Tumblr 101: Tips And Tricks To Get Started
Sebastian Thrun: Google's Driverless Car
FBI Tells Wikipedia to Remove Its Seal, Wikipedia Says It Would Rather Not
Wikileaks may have garnered a lot of attention from national security departments recently, but the FBI is apparently more concerned with another, more visible Wiki. In a July 22nd letter (PDF) addressed to Wikipedia, the Bureau threatened the site with legal action unless it removes the FBI seal from its page. FBI deputy general counsel David Larson justified the request by citing a specific U.S. law that prohibits the duplication of any official "insignia" without due permission. As Larson claims, "The inclusion of a high quality graphic of the FBI seal on Wikipedia is particularly problematic, because it facilitates both deliberate and unwitting" reproduction of the insignia. In response, the Wikimedia Foundation's general counsel Mike Godwin called the FBI's interpretation of the insignia law "idiosyncratic" and "more importantly, incorrect." According to Wikipedia, the FBI ignored the most salient part of the U.S. code, which defines an insignia as "any badge, identification card, or other insignia."
"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," Godwin's letter reads (PDF). "The use of the image on Wikipedia is not for the purpose of deception or falsely to represent anyone as an agent of the federal government." Wikipedia went on to say that it's prepared to battle in court, should the FBI make good on its threat.
Godwin also points out that Wikipedia isn't the only place where you can find the FBI's vaunted seal, as it's also reproduced on the Bureau's online entry on Encyclopedia Britannica. And, now that the FBI has drawn more media attention to its insignia, its seal has already been printed across various news outlets -- all of whom, by the FBI's reasoning, are now evildoers. No one, then, seems to be taking the FBI very seriously, and nor should they. It's obvious that no reasonable human being would ever attempt to deceive the FBI with a Wikipedia print-out. It's still unclear what the FBI's intention was, but we're pretty sure it wasn't aiming for the kind of public embarrassment it's suffered thus far. [From: New York Times, via: CNN and TechDirt]
Featured on Switched:
16 Grammys Looks That Weren't Working
Whitney Houston Autopsy: Cause of Death Determined?
Worst Movie Mistakes: Date Night Edition (PHOTOS)
Whitney Houston, Bobbi Kristina: Late Singer's Daughter Hospitalized
Adele Five-Year Break? Singer Plans to Focus on Relationship, Write 'Happy Record'
PHOTOS: President Obama's Kissing Technique
Jennifer Hudson Whitney Tribute: Grammy President Reveals Why Singer Was Chosen for Musical Memorial
Grammy 2012 Winners' List: Adele Sweeps Music's Biggest Night
How Hattie Lost 300 Pounds: 'I Was Ready To Do Whatever It Took To Survive'
3 Economic Misconceptions That Need to Die
5-Hour Energy: A Success Equal Parts Caffeine, Chemistry and Meditation
Matt Bomer Comes Out As Gay
People With Easy-To-Pronounce Names More Likely To Succeed, Study Says
Katy Perry Grammy Performance 2012: Did the Diva Diss Her Ex-Hubby With Revealing New Song?
Photos Of Dead Lacrosse Player's Injured Body Shown To Jury
Whitney Houston Dead: Stars React to Legend's Sudden Death
Grammy Awards 2012: The Best & Worst Of The Red Carpet!
12 Grammys Stars Who Gave Good Style
The Top 10 Slacker Colleges
15 Funny Valentine's Day Cards
Mystery Disease Kills Thousands
WATCH: 25 Million Tons Of Japan Tsunami Debris Headed Directly Our Way
Remembering The People's Ballerina
Oprah Under Fire For Controversial Tweet
PHOTOS: Thank God For Grown-Up Glamour
JUNGLE SURVIVAL: Marines Drink Snake Blood, Eat Insects
PHOTOS: Model Falls At Dennis Basso Show
New Clues, Details Emerge In Powell Case
PHOTOS: Kate Spends Valentine's Day Solo!
LOOK: Amazing Underwater Photos Of Dogs
PHOTOS: Beautiful Scars
15 Funny Valentine's Day Quotes
Comments
70
Subscribe to commentsAnnetteAug 5th 2010 7:22AM
Do as they request! Take it off!
musomesaAug 5th 2010 8:42AM
(why?)
lonestarryAug 5th 2010 9:21AM
WHY???
tompeteyAug 5th 2010 11:25AM
The FBI seal is a public image. There is no reason that Wiki should take it down and no reason the FBI should ask them to. Good for Wiki - you'e not doing anything wrong or illegal.
downrigerAug 5th 2010 1:12PM
it is the multiple rendering not the image
MicheleAug 5th 2010 7:41AM
The X-Files program shows the FBI badge everytime the show is on. I wonder if the producers got permission to do that? Most shows, etc.. about the FBI depicts them as being 'the good guys', so why would they object?
noreenarshadAug 5th 2010 7:50AM
Well, I'm a muslim, and I heard the thing that once happened about an image of Muhammed being displayed, which is totally whack. I say we respect the FBI as well, and take down the seal. Sometimes, there's information that most shouldn't handle. I mean, I don't see the harm personally, but we don't know that, and we should respect that they don't want it to be shown, the same way you don't want me to show your friends and family and the general public a picture of you getting drunk at a Christmas party and then vomiting on some girl. No matter how stupid, unless that person did it intentionally, and that person must be punished by thier own embarresment and humilty, must a person's consent for an image to be shown or taken down be respected.
LaurieAug 5th 2010 7:59AM
Wow. I have a hard time comparing an image of Muhammed, considered blasphemy by most muslims, with an image of the FBI seal. Despite J. Edgar Hoover's aspiration, the FBI is not a god.
Sally GAug 5th 2010 9:55AM
I understand about individual people who do not want their pictures published, and for noncelebrities I respect that 100%. For celebrities, I respect it about 80%—they shouldn’t be hounded by paparazzi or have private photos posted randomly, but they are in the public eye and should not have expectations of privacy as “regular” citizens.
However, the seal of a government agency is another matter altogether. The FBI seal appears with the copyright-infringement notice on just about every video (VHS or DVD) sold in the U.S.,and has for decades, and most government documents are in the public domain, as they were created using taxpayer dollars. Granted, an official seal is different from a research report, but prior practice, including the FBI’s use of the seal on its own online site, would argue that they have no case, legal or (at least IMHO) moral.
I suspect that this has more to do with distracting WikiMedia from defending its proper publication of recent material related to Afghanistan on WikiLeaks than on any supposed merit—typical bureaucratic nonsense.
I hope that WikiMedia defends this vigorously, and suggests to everyone the possible cause of this case at this time. In its recent publication, WikiLeaks played the N.Y. Times and Washington Post to Bradley Manning’s Daniel Ellsberg of the Vietnam era. Bravo, Wikipedia—don’t be intimidated.
JohnAug 5th 2010 7:56AM
I think the authjor missed point on this remark:
"It's obvious that no reasonable human being would ever attempt to deceive the FBI with a Wikipedia print-out."
People will not use the image to try and deceive the FBI but will use it to look official and deceive other citizens. This will help identity theft or any pervert trying to look official. Why help make it easier for criminals?
deerslayerAug 5th 2010 8:15AM
Yes, the author of this article is obviouly a simpleton. The fact that a high resolution graphic is available means all one has to do is copy and paste it to WORD and you have an official looking letterhead with which to decieve people at will. While wikipedia is not decieving people they are making it possible for others to do so.
noreenarshadAug 5th 2010 8:11AM
Laurie, are you trying to be funny? Because that deeply offended me, my faith, and my sensitivity towards intelligent and clever word play. I'm just saying they know alot of controversy will be caused by it, and they need to respect the fact that they don't want thier image shown. And I agree with John. It's like showing someone an official looking police badge, which can bring alot of power, and were it to be copied, no one knows what type of damage could happen.
TyAug 5th 2010 2:41PM
But if no one outside the government knows what the real thing looks like, what good is the actual seal? If you're claiming that others will use it to dupe people, they can do that readily if no one knows what the real thing looks like.
theworstwayAug 5th 2010 1:07PM
What did she say that offends your faith? All she said was that showing a picture of a prophet isn't the same as showing a picture of the FBIs cute little logo. I think you're being silly...and before you say anything about me not understanding, hold your breath, because my whole family is Muslim and I've read the Quran (don't believe it's "Gods" word though).
Also, the FBI needs to chill out and stop trippin over silly nonsense. If a criminal wants to use the logo to try to trick someone, do you really think wikipedia is the only place he could get the picture?
danzillo4Aug 5th 2010 8:12AM
This is ridiculious...The only place the FBI seal is shown is where wikpedia has a story about the FBI...and no where else!..Other stories show seals of states countries only when there is a story about them...what a crock!
Erik buckAug 5th 2010 8:29AM
If we cannot see what the FBI seal looks like, how will we recognize the genuine article, or not, when some con-man flashes a badge and says he's from the FBI?
johnAug 5th 2010 8:46AM
The FBI probably wants away from anything to do with Wikipedia since Wikipedia is such a joke...
Wikipedia has so many facts wrong that if you look close enough you'll probably find they even copied the FBI emblem wrong !!!!
MEAug 5th 2010 8:49PM
Well if that's the case, John, why is the FBI so intense on getting rid of the seal on Wikipedia? Why is this issue so important when we have REAL issues out there that need attention more than this argument? FBI is very disappointing if this is all they have to do? They are not like the old school FBI. They need new blood in there to organize a better bureau.
LarryAug 5th 2010 8:28AM
Easy solution? Print a 1 point thick white "X" through the image of the FBI seal. Everyone can still see the seal, but it would make reproduction difficult because of the fine "X" running through the image.
kwehdechocoboAug 5th 2010 10:26AM
I don't think Wikipedia itself is doing anything wrong, but I actually think that's a pretty good compromise if they're truly worried about their seal being taken...
Though, while evildoers COULD take the seal from Wikipedia, the FBI seal is all over Google images... so I'm not sure if it would even make a difference.