[Wikipedia-l] Re: no need to remove the article nor the chapter

[Andre Engels]

On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 14:25:43 -0500, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com> wrote:

> So we have two choices, wait for injunction or the criminal charges
> (copyright violation is now a criminal matter :( ) and make the
> argument in court, arguing fine points that have never been tested
> before (how many generations of changes and replacements are needed to
> untaint derived text, is any number sufficient), in a court which is
> likely unfavorable due to the political climate, and potential lose
> years of contributions if we lose the battle. Basically taking a huge
> bet that wikipedia will be large enough to generate a large enough
> public out-cry on the matter to influence the political situation...

Come on!!!! That's not a "huge bet", that's being ridiculous on the
face of it. Basically, if I write something and add it to another
text, does that make my text a copyright violation. NO. There's no
issue about 1, 10 or 100 changes, there's an issue about DIFFERENT
TEXTS!!!!!

> The copyright climate today is a huge burden on our increasingly
> information drive society, we can pay the price every edit, or we can
> roll the dice and pay it all at once, but it will be paid unless the
> laws are changed.

Or until people stop worrying about every little interpretation that
someone could make of the law.

> If everyone takes the bet that the laws will change, there will be
> little direct incentive for anyone to go and change them.

So you want to go and petition to the House "Please change your
copyright laws, because there are people who might argue that they
could be explained in some way." They will write back "That's not how
they are intended" and we're back at square one.

Andre Engels