Wikipedia pwns the FBI

[Il Duce]

The Federal Bureau of Investigation keeps close tabs on the image you see over director Robert Mueller's shoulder — the official FBI seal. Which is why it has threatened the online encyclopedia Wikipedia with criminal prosecution if it doesn't remove the image of the seal that it uses to illustrate the FBI's Wikipedia entry.

As the New York Times reported on Tuesday, the FBI's deputy general counsel actually sent a letter to Wikipedia [pdf] late last month demanding that the site take down a high-resolution rendering of the seal "because it facilitates both deliberate and unwitting violations" of federal restrictions on the use of the image. Indeed, it is a federal crime to "manufactur[e], sel[l], or posses any badge, identification card, or other insignia, of the design prescribed by the head of any department or agency of the United States." And according to the FBI's crack legal team, posting an image of the seal as illustration of an encyclopedia entry constitutes manufacturing, selling, or possessing such an insignia. (Maybe they confused Wikipedia with the villainous WikiLeaks?)

[Why is the FBI picking a fight?]

Wikipedia's lawyers clearly had fun with the request [pdf], particularly because the bureau, in citing federal law, conveniently omitted the words "badge" and "identification card," apparently to make it seem like the law simply governed images as opposed to fake credentials. "While we appreciate your desire to revise the statute to reflect your expansive vision of it," the site's lawyers wrote, "the fact is that we must work with the actual language of the statute, not the aspirational version ... that you forwarded to us." The site went on to politely decline the request and indicate it would gladly see the feds in court: "Badges and identification cards are physical manifestations that may be used by a possessor to invoke the authority of the federal government. An encyclopedia article is not."

If the FBI is concerned about the proliferation of digital reproductions of its seal online — which, as a simple Google image search will confirm, is indeed rampant — they might want to stop posting high-resolution images of it all over their website. And if they're concerned about counterfeit badges, they should also stop posting close-up photos for fakers to crib from.

Link to pdf of wikipedia's response to the FBI.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/us/20100803-wiki-LetterToLarson.pdf

[MCSCOTT]

Man that was a great letter, and signed

With all appropriate respect,

I'm going to have to remember that way of wording things.

[vontar]

lol.

Now by doing this, they drew extra unwanted, unneeded attention to it.

Of course if they do press the issue, it will be our tax dollars spent for nothing.

[I_Like_Pie]

Love it....

edited. Even better - Read the PDF - The pwnage is much, much better! Wikipedia basically put them through a literary meat grinder.

edited again....even better. The Wikipedia chief council's last name is Godwin....FTW!!!

Edited August 4, 2010 by I_Like_Pie

[kb4ns]

:rofl:

[G27]

Hahaha, love it.

[peejman]

Funny and sad.

Funny - the FBI's General Counsel got bitch-slapped by a corporate attorney.

Sad - the FBI's General Counsel got bitch-slapped by a corporate attorney, and our tax dollars pay that guy.

[Chucktshoes]

[Guest jackdm3]

And the ref's praying it never happens to him.

[Pain103]

The wording other insignia will cover the seal. But that's very odd to just come out say remove a emblem when no one is trying to impersonate an agent. I'm sure there is something going on.

[kb4ns]

The wording other insignia will cover the seal. But that's very odd to just come out say remove a emblem when no one is trying to impersonate an agent. I'm sure there is something going on.

I thought so at first, too. Read the entire letter, though. The case law they point out with their fancy-schmancy latin terminology lead me to believe the Wiki counsel has his ducks in a row and the FBI doesn't. They better watch out how they interpret stuff - they don't want to end up with the same reputation as the ATF...

[Guest Drewsett]

Funny and sad.

Funny - the FBI's General Counsel got bitch-slapped by a corporate attorney.

Sad - the FBI's General Counsel got bitch-slapped by a corporate attorney, and our tax dollars pay that guy.

Once again more proof that government service attracts the dregs of society.

As my father used to like to say "All judges are failed lawyers", I guess an addendum would be "all gov't officials are failed...well, human beings"

Oh and the above comment is directed in no way at the police (and that isn't sarcasm either, I have no desire to be on vacation).

Edited August 5, 2010 by Drewsett
grammatical error

[MCSCOTT]

Once again more proof that government service attracts the dregs of society.

As my father used to like to say "All judges are failed lawyers", I guess an addendum would be "all gov't officials are failed...well, human beings"

Oh and the above comment is directed at no way in the police (and that isn't sarcasm either, I have no desire to be on vacation).

There's actually alot of truth to that with different forms of government jobs. No offense intended for anyone in any job, but from my past experiences I've seen it alot in this area. I've known several people that failed as a police officer and ended up a fire fighter. Also, when I was in h/s I was in the explorer program here with the city police, thinking about going into law enforcement when I was old enough. There were several other reasons I quit that program, but one of the biggest reasons was that they started using the program as a form of rehab for underage criminals. Don't get me wrong though, this did seem to work because several of the bad trouble makers that I knew back then are now LEO's. It turned them into really good guys, but back then I didn't want to be in a group that everyone looked at as criminals.