Is that enough proof for you [expletives]? I was right. You were WRONG.
An anonymous Wikipedia editor based in Florida • On the news that New York Times reporter David Rohde was in fact captured by the Taliban and escaped. What this jerk didn’t know was that The Times, with the help of Wikipedia king Jimmy Wales himself, was blocking the information from the site to prevent news of his capture from reaching the mainstream media. If Rohde’s fate was known, they feared, his chances of escape would be much lower. Wales was not thrilled with the process but willing to help. “We were really helped by the fact that it hadn’t appeared in a place we would regard as a reliable source,” he said. “I would have had a really hard time with it if it had.” • source
Judge: Let’s outlaw linking!In this corner:Seventh Circuit Appeals Court Judge Richard Posner, based out of Chicago. A pretty smart guy. His argument:Posner, in an argument on his blog, says that “Expanding copyright law … to bar linking to or paraphrasing copyrighted materials without the copyright holder’s consent, might be necessary to keep free riding on content financed by online newspapers.” Why he doesn’t get itBecause his idea is against the very nature of the Internet and nobody would support him. Plus, his article has a trackback function enabled to encourage linking!
Columnist: Let’s tighten laws!In this corner:Connie Schultz, a Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist for the Cleveland Plain Dealer, still a solid print product. Her argument:Schultz says that there’s too many free riders on the journalism bandwagon and they’re coming at the cost of newspaper revenue. She subscribes to David and Daniel Marburger’s theory that copyright law needs to force aggregators to share ad revenue with producers. Why she doesn’t get itWhile her idea is less crazy than Posner’s (she’s not advocating the blocking of linking), it’s cut from the same cloth. Also, you can share her column on Reddit and Digg!