From: "user_Jamesday" <user_Jamesday(a)myrealbox.com>
Where I disagree is in cases like abuse or personal
information about
themselves which private people contributing to the Wikipedia
(rather than public record about public figures) want
removed.
This is not a copyright issue. If someone places material on Wikipedia, they
do so, they have the right to do so and as long as that information is not
defamatory or breaking any laws there should be no prohibition against
posting any such information. The persons posting information is responsible
for posting it, not the volunteers nor Jimbo. It is the person who has
posted the information who is responsible for it, not the OSP, this seems to
be the case law that you and I have been reviewing lately James.
Our removal also makes it a bit easier for them to
pursue a right of
privacy action against whoever is harassing them,
though I wouldn't like to speculate on their
chance of success.
I think if a person posts information about themselves anywhere on the
internet there is a reasonable expectation that it can be
reposted by other people. It is not the job of Wikipedia to determine when
to take down information they have put up there.
Once it is out there it is irrelevant if it is hidden in the page history
files. The person who is harrassing them is abusing that
information and they have a claim against that person, not Wikipedia.
There is one fact that you do not seem to keep in mind, the user page
creates a link to the person in the world outside Wikipedia. This is
important in terms of authorship. Each user has copyright to their
contributions and if someone wants to relicense Wikipedia content they have
some expectation that there will be some way to determine that a user has
contributed. Otherwise such user can be submitting infringing content.
Of course if someone has a reason (like Isis did as it appears to me) then
that person can discuss it with Jimbo (and I am guessing
it will eventually be a Wikimedia board decision once we become a
constitutional monarchy).
Actually the arbitration process that is being created for banning people
could also be used to resolve all these types of issues. Personally I would
think it would be better to do it in such a context that have these kinds of
non-copyright issues discussed to death.
I became part of Wikipedia because I liked making contributions to the
encyclopedia I am finding that I am spending way too much of my available
volunteer time responding to opinions about issues that are just plain wrong
or misleading.
Can I make a complaint to the arbitration committee about that?
Alex756