2009/9/21 Andrew Turvey <[email protected]>: > ----- "WereSpielChequers" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I'm more concerned about what happens when something is posted to our >> site that is unfair, inaccurate and full of malice. Presumably >> Wikimedia in the US is the publisher > I understand that the Foundation claim that they are not the publisher of > Wikipedia, just the "operator". So if an editor posts something on Wikipedia > the foundation has the same legal liability as, for instance, an ISP which > hosts a website containing problematic content. > I don't know if this has ever been tested in court. Yes in the US. WMF said they weren't suable over the content because of CDA section 230 and the case was immediately thrown out on that basis. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230_of_the_Communications_Decency_Act I suppose another country could deem WMF the publisher under their own laws. (They could deem a piece of cheese the publisher.) - d. _______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list [email protected] http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
