[WikiEN-l] The Register decries Wikipedia's "censorship" via OTRS

[Jimmy Wales]

On Jul 7, 2007, at 5:43 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote:
> As much as I hate to admit it, they have a point this time.

No, actually they don't have much of a point at all.

> We can't
> just accept every demand to take down a page and leave it down for a
> fortnight.

But see, this is exactly what happens when you trust the Register to  
report on anything accurately.  We certainly do NOT "accept every  
demand to take down a page" nor is it normal or usual for a page to  
be "down for a fortnight".

Every case is different, and while it is of course sensible to always  
be vigilant for ways to improve the OTRS system and practice, the  
Register was completely unfair in their "reporting".

> I don't have access to OTRS, so I don't know what this was
> about, but from the talk page it would appear to be related to
> trademark issues. Since when have encyclopedias been restricted from
> using trademarked terms? We're not selling lava lamps, we're just
> talking about them - IANAL, but I'm pretty sure trademark law does not
> apply.

That's right, but real legal threats from real lawyers have to be  
taken seriously.  I think this case could have been handled  
differently, and that's worth talking about.  But the hysteria of the  
Register is well known, and should be taken into account here.

--Jimbo