Re^3: Editing pirated content links in reaped nodes (no)

Also, if editorial intervention is used to remove such a link, then this sets a precedence that makes it more likely that PerlMonks can be held legally liable if there is ever a link that doesn't get editorially removed. I don't think it is wise to take actions that increase the risk of legal liability to the site and its owners / operators

How 'bout not removing the link but editing the node to include a visually distinctive warning in point of the link being say something like "suspect of linking to pirated material?" IAFFBAL ("far from being") but shouldn't that

clearly warn (by definition) those (most) that do want to avoid such material anyway and;
decrease the risk of legal liability to the site?

(Sorry for replying so late!)

--
~~If you can't understand the incipit, then please check the IPB Campaign.~~

Comment on Re^3: Editing pirated content links in reaped nodes (no) Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Editing pirated content links in reaped nodes (no) by tye (Sage) on Sep 13, 2008 at 14:30 UTC
That sounds a bit like the worst of both worlds. A policy of manual intervention by appointed representatives while not removing the links might create legal jeopardy for that action alone, not just for failure to take that action at some point in future. - tye	[reply]
Re^5: Editing pirated content links in reaped nodes (no) by blazar (Canon) on Sep 14, 2008 at 12:29 UTC
I personally believe that one cannot say but D'Oh! I had hoped that stressing the point on suspicion (of piracy) as opposed to certainty would have made things quite different. However I stand corrected, and I will shut up forever! ;) `--` If you can't understand the incipit, then please check the IPB Campaign.	[reply] [d/l]