Talk:Captive's library in Guantanamo
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Copyright violation???
Consider me dumbfounded at the accusation of copyright violation. The article is referenced by multiple sources.
The only part of this article I imagine is thought of as a copyright violation would be the letter by the detainee excerpted in the huffpost's very special sob story. I fail to see how the huffpost could claim a copyright on the excerpt, and I doubt that the detainee expressed any terms. If it's fair use for the huffpost then it should be fair use here.
-- Randy2063 20:49, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] What Andy Worthington had to say about the copyright issue.
I wrote to Andy Worthington, the historian who wrote the article, that quoted the letter, that another wikipedian is concerned is a copyright violation. He said:
"I can tell you, however, that the Abdul Aziz letter was declassified by the military and has no copyright issues attached to it. It was first posted on Cageprisoners."
Well, if the concerned wikipedian is worried the material was violating Andy Worthington's copyright, I think his reply should set their worry at rest.
If the concerned wikipedian is worried the extensive quote was violating the Guantanamo captive's copyright:
- This didn't occur to me when I posted the material. Maybe I should have been.
- In retrospect however, I have read arguments that prisoners have no realistic expectation of privacy. I know the LAPD tapped the phone prisoners in the LA county jail accessed. for several consecutive years.[1]
- Abdul Aziz almost certainly meant for his letter to be made public.
Cheers! Geo Swan 22:04, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
- ^ The LAPD's use of the wiretap was actually pretty questionable. Officers monitored the prisoner's phone 24/7. If a prisoner's conversation with an outsider suggested their outside contact was currently in possession of drugs, or weapons, the officers monitoring the tap would phone 911, on an ouside line, and make a wink-wink, nudge-nudge, "anonymous tip". So far as the 911 record keeping went, they would receive a call from an anonymous concerned citizen, that such and such a car, or such and such a house, contained illicit material, and dispatch a squad car to check out the anonymous tip. So far as the record-keeping went the subsequent arrests were based on anonymous tips, not officers violating caller's right to privacy.