[WikiEN-l] Does WP have legal advice?

Sat Dec 10 08:09:02 UTC 2005

Tom Cadden wrote:

>Has Wikipedia ever got professional legal advice? A lot of the legal analysis I hear on WP seems to be amateur interpretation of statutes, or comments by people who say they are lawyers but who, because of their anonymous status, may not be, or who may be undergraduate legal students. 
>
I'll never understan how people who willing to challenge received wisdom 
still manage to fall on their knees before lawuers.

>I know it would be costly, but I think recent cases, plus issues over images other issues, are IMHO crying out of absolutely professional legal advice. It may well already have received it, but much of the commentary on WP doesn't show evidence of it. We need to be 100% certain of the legality of our actions in all cases. We cannot risk finding that, quite innocently, that we are breaking one or more laws and face the threat of large fines or even an injunction closing us down. 
>
There is no such thing as 100% certainty!  When it comes to court 
judgement they only serve to prove that 50% of lawyers are wrong.

>Far smaller publications than WP have lawyers check things all the time. If we don't already have full legal advice available it is VITAL that we get it. It would be irresponsible to run an entity like WP and not have it. 
>
We are dealing with a conflicting patchword of international laws.  
Judgements have also been in conflict.  We'll get a lot further ahead 
with a common sense approach to law.  This requires a balance between 
overly agressive and pusilanimous interpretations.

Ec