Attorneys at a New Jersey based debt collection agency tried to use a Wikipedia page as evidence that a certain individual owed the collection agencies $30,000 in credit card debt. The court, presumably understanding what Wikipedia is and who creates the pages (uhh, anybody who wants to), ruled that the page could not be admitted as evidence. What's even more absurd is that the firm was attempting to show a chain of acquisitions among banks and credit card companies ultimately resulting in the firms ownership of the debt through a Wikipedia page. I mean, if the company is reputable there ought to be some sort of official record of the transactions.
Posted by plastic at 4:31:00 PM