On 20/04/06, Kirill Lokshin
<kirill.lokshin(a)gmail.com> wrote:
How would that matter, though? It's the
content being removed that's
sensitive, not the fact that *something* is gone; and if the offending
revisions are deleted/hidden/whatever, there's no way for someone to
get at that content (at least not directly from us).
Sure there is, especially if the offending material has been sitting
on the site for, oh, say, 4 months? This is where the "free flow of
information" thing comes in - it's precisely because we're focused on
getting information out there quickly that it's incredibly hard to mop
it up suddenly if we need to. After 4 months, there are probably
several hundred copies of the material available on the net, possibly
even more on various users' hard disks, without mentioning Google's
cache,
archive.org ....
I would assume (not being a lawyer) that the possibility of our
getting sued and such increases substantially if *we* continue to
distribute the information, versus *someone else* distributing it;
presumably the people who actually deal with this can comment more
concretely.
Kirill Lokshin