wjhon...@aol.com hett schreven: > You are missing the key point. The pivot upon which the issue turns > is not whether or not a site is non-commercial or educational. The > pivot is whether the site itself creates the content, or whether it > merely hosts the content. > > Wikimedia Commons is more likely to be viewed as a host agent like > Flicker or Facebook, and not a creator. > A host does not have a legal requirement to maintain any records of > this sort.
I am not a US citizen and I do not know US laws. But if law requires record keeping for explicit content so that it is possible to verify that the content is legal, it's meaningful that re-users also keep the name and contact info of the person who keeps the initial USC 2257 records. That way the content stays traceable. So I agree with what Stillwater Rising said: > To clarify, I did not then and still do > not believe OTRS should be directly handing Personally Identifying > Information (PII) for sexual content, but should have a way of verifying > that it exists by at least keeping on file the name and address of the > individual(s) who are keeping the records. Marcus Buck User:Slomox _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l