Wiki class action lawsuit
p2p news / p2pnet: An anonymous site calling itself WikipediaClassAction has been set up for people, "who believe that they have been defamed and or who have been or are the subject of anonymous and malicious postings to the popular online encyclopedia WikiPedia".
It’s inspired by the Chase / Seigenthaler case in which the former posted untruths about the later in a Wiki item.
"The basic problem is that none of the Trustees of Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., nor any of the volunteers who are connected with Wikipedia, consider themselves responsible and therefore accountable for the content," says the anti-Wiki site.
"They believe themselves to be above the law."
The site’s creator(s) say the plan is to, "Expose the inherent faults and flaws of the Wikipedia online encyclopedia" and "Force Wikimedia Foundation Inc., through legal action, to change its current practices that permit anyone to post content to their website, without formal attribution and without recourse back to Wikimedia Foundation and or the author of the content".
Meanwhile, as a result of the Chase / Seigenthaler fiasco, Wikipedia users now have to register before they can post.
Also read:-
Chase / Seigenthaler – Wiki hoax post author apologises, December 12, 2005
December 12th, 2005 at 8:39 pm
Dumbasses. They can’t control what others write on Wikipedia.
They didn’t write it, nor tell anyone else to write it, so how can you blame them for it?
It’s like a guy owns a gun shop. Someone comes in, buys a gun and goes and kills his wife.
The gun shop owner isn’t responsible for the buyer’s (or in Wikipedia’s case, the users’) actions. He hasn’t done anything illegal, he just sold the gun it’s up to the buyer how to use it. Dumbasses. I hope their lawsuit fails mizerably.
December 12th, 2005 at 9:45 pm
The article is in error in stating that people now have to register to post. People now have to register *to initiate an article*. Unregistered people continue to be able to edit existing articles; the Seigenthaler mess would not be prevented: the libel was in an edit to an existing article.
(I don’t wish to register here because of privacy concerns, but I’m Bill Thayer of http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/home.html and will confirm it if you send me an e-mail. I also edit as a registered user, under my own name, on Wickedpedia.)
December 12th, 2005 at 9:55 pm
And after I find myself insulted, albeit only in private, by being called an “Anonymous Coward”, I e-mailed you at the address you yourself give,
jon@p2pnet.net
and my e-mail was promptly returned because
“The following message could not be delivered to jon@p2pnet.net because the domain p2pnet.net does not exist.”
Well, I can see that it does, at least on the Web if not as an e-mail server: but this takes the cake! In fact, it is you (whoever you are) that are hiding anonymously.
Bill Thayer
(at address previously stated)
December 12th, 2005 at 10:29 pm
Hi Bill:
Thanks for pointing this out.
Interesting, in the Confucian sense. jon@p2pnet.net used to be OK, although I admit I haven’t tried it for many moons.
So I’ve replaced it with another email addie that I know works.
I don’t even want to think about how many emails I’ve missed because of this
Cheers!
December 12th, 2005 at 10:32 pm
oops – someones upset =)
lighten up
December 12th, 2005 at 10:46 pm
The frivolous lawsuit site is obviously written up by an ambulance chaser, likely in league with folks like Andrew Orlowsky who are miffed no one ever takes him seriously. Funny how so many of the first-amendment pundits are having such a hard time with regular folks defining for themselves what is true. Just too asinine for words, really.
December 13th, 2005 at 12:42 am
No harm done, Jon; but notice that there can be many! reasons why someone appears to be anonymous…. As for the e-mails you’ve missed, take it from someone with a big website: 98% of them weren’t important, or worse. People whose e-mails were (or who like me, thought they were!), they’da prolly made an effort to get to you somehow.
Bill
December 13th, 2005 at 1:00 am
In fact, the email addie _does_ work: it’s just slow.
I posted to myself at jon@p2pnet.net, “Does I jon@p2pnet.net exist and am I, therefore?”
It duly arrived and therefore I am, I guess. And so is the email addie. But the one you sent hasn’t shown up.
Cheers!
December 13th, 2005 at 6:09 am
This is ridiculous. So someone thought Wikipedia was a legitimate resource? Puleeze!
The website owners have no assessment of blame here. It is very well known that ANYONE can add to or change the information. That disclaimer on their site is enough for anyone with a fourth grade education to understand how totally unreliable the information could be.
After your class action against Wiki, do one for all the lying journalists on TV.
What is YOUR last name jon – or is this a made-up name? See, just about anything is possible in this arena.
December 14th, 2005 at 11:54 am
It bounced immediately; i.e., was returned to me. After checking I’d got the address right, I didn’t resend it, of course.
B
B
December 14th, 2005 at 8:59 pm
I am no trademark lawyer, but using the Wikipedia logo/trademark on the lawsuit site seems like infringement to me. Plus, the fact that the site doesn’t list the firm involved raises red flags too. Furthermore, the media has said a “group” in Long Beach, NY… What group? Where does the media get that information? Couldn’t it be one guy sitting in his underwear in his basement chomping on an unlit cigar? Could the media be…oh I don’t know..wrong?!?!?!?
December 14th, 2005 at 11:18 pm
The real story is of course on http://www.wikipediaclassaction.com/ not on .org
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:50 pm
Hello admin, nice site ! Good content, eautiful design, thank !1
July 19th, 2007 at 5:42 am
On WikipediaClassAction.Com: guys, you’ve been had…. The site is an obvious spoof. Among the tipoffs: their address is given, in part, as “Springfield, TA” (tell me what state that is); and their phone numbers are on the 555- exchange.