[Wikipedia-l] Re: Two issues here: what is legal to have on the server and what is legal in the user's nation

Thu May 22 16:21:13 UTC 2003

Lee Daniel Crocker wrote:
> Indeed, I would consider it heroic to violate local laws to post
> useful information on Wikipedia, such as first-hand descriptions of
> the acts of despotic governments, or information about how to
> defeat net access restrictions.

I agree.  I still do not recommend that people do it, out of concern
for their personal wellbeing.  In some countries, it could potentially
be very dangerous, and for that reason, I say that each person should
follow their own conscience and do what they can.

> A more tricky issue is postings that are legal elsewhere but not
> legal in California, such as the posting of information that is
> public domain in places whose legislature isn't owned by Disney.
> We probably have to supress such information, which is a shame.

Yes, I agree that we probably do, and that it is a shame in some
cases.  But usually the fact that we're doing an encyclopedia means
that we aren't all that interested in posting such information, except
in a context that's a pretty easy slam-dunk fair use, anyway.

Fortunately, by and large, the United States is still the most
free-speech friendly nation.  So it's only in some rare cases that
U.S. law might be more strict than laws elsewhere.

One striking example would be information about how to 'crack' the DVD
encryption software.  Such information is encyclopedic, but it is also
potentially illegal to post in the U.S.

--Jimbo