QUOTE(chrisoff @ Thu 15th April 2010, 12:15am)
Did I miss something? Is Cirt Smeelgova? (I assumed Cirt was a guy.)
Cirt has acknowledged several times that her prior account was Smee[lgova] (most recently
here). Actually,
SmeeÂ
(T-C-L-K-R-D)
redirects to
CirtÂ
(T-C-L-K-R-D)
today; she created a redirect for it recently.
She changed her account name from Smeelgova to Smee some time in 2007, then stopped editing, came back as Curt Wilhelm vonSavage three months later, when the 2007 Scientology arbitration had ended, and renamed that account to Cirt some time after that. The rest is history. (IMG:
smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)
QUOTE(taiwopanfob @ Thu 15th April 2010, 11:33am)
QUOTE(HRIP7 @ Mon 12th April 2010, 6:23pm)
You forgot
Mike Godwin, the Foundation lawyer, who weighed in
here in Cirt's support, arguing
QUOTE
"But even if there is a cognizable copyright claim, the better remedy in my view is to let the injured copyright holder invoke DMCA takedown remedies (with which of course the WMF would comply)."
Gee! This strikes me as failing the "red flag test" of the OCILA (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_Copyright_Infringement_Liability_Limitation_Act#Red_Flags). If Commons is "cognizant" of a copyright claim, they just can't keep it around and await a DMCA notice -- they have to take action on their own in order to protect their own "safe harbor".
I think this is why Pieter said that nobody on Commons usually cares much about what Mike Godwin says.