[Haskell-cafe] black Wikipedia

[John Meacham]

And such a thing can take months or years for the courts to figure
out, and unless your free site has a lawyer to fight for your side,
under SOPA/PIPA you can be down the entire time with little recourse.
For anyone hosting content lke hackage, github, etc. when you have
thousands of packages, someone somewhere is going to be upset by
something and will be able to take the site down. _regardless of the
merit of their case_ the site will go down as they figure it out. Not
only that, they would be able to take the site down if it contains a
link to an objectionable site. for instance, if one of the homepage
fields in some cabal file  somewhere pointed to a site that someone
took offense too on it. we would not only be obligated to patrol the
code uploaded, but the targets of any urls within said
code/description... and retroactively remove stuff if said links
change to contain objectional material. (for a very vauge definition
of objectionable). it is a really messed up law.

    John

On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Hans Aberg <haberg-1 at telia.com> wrote:
> On 18 Jan 2012, at 23:11, Brandon Allbery wrote:
>
>>> There is the Beastie Boys case, where the judge decided copyright protects what is creatively unique.
>>
>> But such judgments are rare, sadly.  And for every Beastie Boys case there's at least one The Verve case.
>
> I did not know that. But it was a UK case, wasn't it? - UK copyright laws are a lot more tight.
>
> Hans
>
>