The thing I don't understand here is why they don't censor other sites that also carry the image - as was brought up on the wiki, Amazon has the image, and many stores that sell the album have the image. If Wikipedia's usage is illegal, why isn't their usage illegal? -- --FastLizard4 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:FastLizard4
Gregory Maxwell wrote: > On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 12:57 AM, David Monniaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> It is actually true that some ISP have mistakenly blocked all accesses >> to Wikimedia sites. >> >> We have received a complaint to that effect on OTRS, from a ISP >> technician. It seems that their upstream provider screwed up their >> redirection hacks (using BGP) and mistakenly propagated them to its clients. >> > > I was aware of that. I didn't consider it the same. > > For those unaware of how this works: The participating ISPs > re-announce one of Wikimedia's IPs in their own networks in order to > hijack all the connections. Normally these reannouncments are not > distributed outside of the providers network. But mistakes can be > made. This is how, a few months ago, Pakistan managed to knock youtube > off the internet. > > A single configuration glitch from one of these blocking ISPs may have > the same effect. > > _______________________________________________ > Wikipedia-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l > _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
