chris_lilley - Slashdot User

Long-Term Wikipedia Vandalism Exposed 313

Posted by kdawson on Monday November 06, 2006 @03:39AM from the pseudoscience-and-self-promotion dept.

Daveydweeb writes, "The accuracy of Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia, came into question again when a long-standing article on 'NPA personality theory' was confirmed to be a hoax. Not only had the article survived at Wikipedia for the better part of a year, but it had even been listed as a 'Good Article,' supposedly placing it in the top 0.2-0.3% of all Wikipedia articles — despite being almost entirely written by the creator of the theory himself."

Comment Re:License revocation on lawsuit . . . (Score 2, Insightful) 95

by chris_lilley on Wednesday March 19, 2003 @06:00PM (#5547542) Attached to: Revised W3C Patent Policy Out, Comments Invited

Since other folks clarified that the suit needs to be about patents that are claimed to be essential for implementing W3C specifications, it just remains to fill out point 1 and swap A and B in your point 4:

1. Entities A, B ..Z implement a W3C standard, in the process receiving a royalty-free license for some implicated technology from Entities A, B ...Z.

4. B sues A on a related matter, for example they claim a patent on some essential W3C technology

As a result:

5. A sends B their new license terms for the assorted patents they hold, plus a request for prompt payment of fees or removal of product from distribution

6. B considers whether they can pass this cost on to their customers and still remain competitive with C..Z who still get A's patent claims royalty free.

Slashdot Top Deals