<img alt="" height="1" width="1" />Would a [b]Wikipedia blackout be such a bad thing?[/b]
ZDNet (blog)
Summary: If Wikipedia shut its doors temporarily in protest at upcoming US anti-piracy legislation, how could it affect the web as we know it? Are you a student who relies on Wikipedia for research ...
and more »
View the article
QUOTE
As one debater noted, Wikipedia is probably riddled with copyright violations. Unless Wikipedia was willing to spend an enormous budget — for which it doesn’t have — regulating and checking every contribution, it probably wouldn’t be able to survive in the online world of SOPA.
"For which it doesn't have"? Can someone explain to the author why the WMF will never hire anyone to deal with user-submitted content, and that the reason for so many copyright violations is ideological (i.e., "Anyone can edit")? I tried, but the comment system didn't like me.
QUOTE(carbuncle @ Tue 13th December 2011, 3:36pm) 
QUOTE
As one debater noted, Wikipedia is probably riddled with copyright violations. Unless Wikipedia was willing to spend an enormous budget — for which it doesn’t have — regulating and checking every contribution, it probably wouldn’t be able to survive in the online world of SOPA.
"For which it doesn't have"? Can someone explain to the author why the WMF will never hire anyone to deal with user-submitted content, and that the reason for so many copyright violations is ideological (i.e., "Anyone can edit")? I tried, but the comment system didn't like me.
I left this comment:
QUOTE
"As one debater noted, Wikipedia is probably riddled with copyright violations. Unless Wikipedia was willing to spend an enormous budget — for which it doesn’t have — regulating and checking every contribution, it probably wouldn’t be able to survive in the online world of SOPA."
Charlie, while you're cute, you don't understand the nature and purpose of the Wikimedia Foundation. They refuse to spend any money on editorial staff because that would call into question their protections under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. But when you get right down to it, the problem of so many copyright violations is not financial, but ideological (i.e., the mantra of "Anyone can edit").
Protesting this potential law is the easiest, cheapest way for the Wikimedia Foundation to protect its platform of libel, defamation, and copyright violation. They do not know how to act in a way that's challenging or costly, even if such a way would be the ethically correct way forward.
Charlie, while you're cute, you don't understand the nature and purpose of the Wikimedia Foundation. They refuse to spend any money on editorial staff because that would call into question their protections under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. But when you get right down to it, the problem of so many copyright violations is not financial, but ideological (i.e., the mantra of "Anyone can edit").
Protesting this potential law is the easiest, cheapest way for the Wikimedia Foundation to protect its platform of libel, defamation, and copyright violation. They do not know how to act in a way that's challenging or costly, even if such a way would be the ethically correct way forward.
QUOTE(carbuncle @ Tue 13th December 2011, 8:36pm)
QUOTE
As one debater noted, Wikipedia is probably riddled with copyright violations. Unless Wikipedia was willing to spend an enormous budget — for which it doesn’t have — regulating and checking every contribution, it probably wouldn’t be able to survive in the online world of SOPA.
"For which it doesn't have"? Can someone explain to the author why the WMF will never hire anyone to deal with user-submitted content, and that the reason for so many copyright violations is ideological (i.e., "Anyone can edit")? I tried, but the comment system didn't like me.
One debater? "Riddled" was used by Townlake (T-C-L-K-R-D) . But there were others making that point. About half of those seem to be active here, Cla86, Radek, myself... It is obviously largely heretics who feel that the good shop Wikimedia should be proactive in using some of its dosh to try to avoid stealing other people's work.
Maybe sighted edits will be brought back. That would do wonders to control vandals, trolls, POV-pushing sockpuppets etc too but, no doubt, the "anyone can edit" crowd would object.
It would be interesting to know how the level of copyright problems etc in the German wiki compare with those in the English one.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.