Quote:
Originally Posted by Derwood
This clearly isn't a case of someone who works for Wikipedia doing the editing. Since anyone with web access can edit these pages (and there are now hundreds of thousands of entries there), it's impossible for the staff there to keep up. To disallow user created content/editing is to destroy what makes Wikipedia unique. It's a lose/lose situation for celebrities.
|
Then I see him winning the case and more suits coming. You have to have safeguards, plain and simple. These people aren't Irving Schnieder, who lives down the block and no one is ever going to truly wiki for him.
These people have fans, family, friends, business people, etc. from all over the world. Some people use Wiki and have no idea it's user based and anyone can add anything. If it affects their lives and they have repeatedly asked it to be stopped and Wiki refused and allowed it to continue, then he has a good case.
If WIki cannot somehow protect people and organizations from false attacks like this then they'll eventually be sued out of existence and rightfully so. You can't slander, libel and just tarnish someone's good name and then say, "well we allow anyone to put anything in there." That's negligent.