[WikiEN-l] RE: Removing personal information was: RE:Copyrightedmaterial on Wikipedia

Mon Oct 6 19:50:03 UTC 2003

From: "user_Jamesday" <user_Jamesday at myrealbox.com>

>  It is partially a copyright issue if it is asserted that it must remain
available because it was released under the GFDL.

There is nothing in the GFDL that states that someone must continue to
distribute material under the GFDL, it can
be withdrawn from publication. However, if there is a copy out there that
copy cannot be withdrawn. You have
not changed my mind. It is not a copyright issue for Wikipedia and once
someone grants a GFDL license no one
can force them to revoke it.  It is a perpetual license. That is why it is
important that people know this before
posting personal information.

>   It's simply good for the project and socially responsible.

I agree with you on that point, it makes sense to take down legitimate
personal information if requested it creates goodwill.
BTW Quebec has privacy laws similar to the EU.

> Can you think of any legal or rights negotiation purpose
> which can't be reasonably facilitated by those means
> and which isn't already redundant because of the very
> broad GFDL license grant? The most likely one which
> comes to my mind is a publication which doesn't want
>  to use the GFDL. Such a publication is already in
> serious trouble when it comes to anonymous
> contributions.

Why?  If someone wants to allow anonymous contributions that is perfectly
legal. Usually writers who wish to be anonymous appoint
someone as an agent (usually a lawyer because a lawyer cannot disclose the
identity of his/her client if the client wishes this information to be kept
confidential for a legal purpose) to certify that the work is the original
contribution of the copyright holder.
I think on the internet with anonymous contributions a site remains an OSP
and is not an information provider. Doesn't this solve your hypothetical?

>> Can I make a complaint to the arbitration committee about that? <<

> Absolutely! Can I make one as well?:) This is one reason why I'm trying to
make the legal articles clear to normal people - I've had to correct so many
errors over the years, even though I'm not a lawyer...:)

That was a joke on my part. I don't think anyone is envisioning the
arbitration committee to be something anyone bring any complaint
to, just potential baning issues.  ;-)

Alex756