[WikiEN-l] NPG copyright irony

[David Gerard]

On 21 March 2011 10:11, Carcharoth <carcharothwp at googlemail.com> wrote:

> What should happen here and what implications does it have for
> copyright situations? Can you claim copyright on a piece of text
> buried deep in page history, many months or years ago, that has since
> been extensively rewritten? Does the amount of time it was visible and
> published in the Wikipedia article matter (this can range from seconds
> to years)? Can website E legitimately claim copyright on the text if
> they are the only ones publishing it and the Wikipedia article
> currently says something different?
> I think I know the answers to these questions, but am not sure, so
> want to see what others think.


I think the real answer is "we'll see if we have the terrible
misfortune to have it hit court".

The fine details of law like this are not resolved until someone
brings a case. The opposing lawyers then attempt to pull the
resolution of the quantum uncertainty in a direction that suits their
client. Case law ensues. Positing a world where laws are resolved as
people think they *should* be, as worked out by a long chain of
non-lawyer logical postulates and syllogisms, does not match how the
world works. The correct answer right now is "nobody knows."


- d.