Wikipediaclassaction
Thursday, 15. December 2005, 13:18:11
Just after the Seigentaler case, and after a long debate over how and why the Wikipedia should be controlled better, there appeared another strange thing. Its interesting that you can try to sue a website over its contents, brought in by individuals, even if the Site won't encourage this behaviour. So if A says something about B and its written on the wall of C. They are both going to hit C, because if C wouldn't have built the wall A wouldn't have written such things, welcome to the logic of the 21st Century.
At the end it all boils down to more money and power. The next step will be to sue people for not buying certain products, or chosing the product of other companies, because there are high advertising costs and they are ment for something, so shop damn customer!
At the end it all boils down to more money and power. The next step will be to sue people for not buying certain products, or chosing the product of other companies, because there are high advertising costs and they are ment for something, so shop damn customer!
WIDGETIZE
haavard # 26. December 2005, 16:28
Thankfully, it seems that the Wikipedia foundation is well equipped to fight back. Another site, Wikinews, has an investigation going on. Apparently the class action lawsuit has links to possible earthquake charity fraud. Indeed, there seem to be ties to groups accusing Wikipedia of being a "pedophile haven" too. And the clues seem to go back to the same source...
ch_b # 27. December 2005, 09:11
I think the word used was something like "Wikipediophiles" for bashing the Authors, anyway this campaign has the level of a slashdot troll.