== Re: That 09 DVD string page deletion review == 

 Re the deletion review article, closed, at  
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review 
 headed:  

 "09 9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 – the community doesn't vote on what is or is not legally problematic (and it's been oversighted anyway). – bainer (talk) " 

  
 I note that the discussion is apparently closed, hence my comment here. I appreciate there is some cause for legal analysis, but as a lawyer I would prefer to see a solution that encourages debate, rather than just shuts it down in fear (which is the apparent intent of the DMCA, regardless of assessment of that law's actual operation in the specific circumstances, or of free speech, fair use or other potential countervailing principles).  
 I'm not sure what the solution is, but I think it is important that readers can somehow, through heading to a page with at least part of the number, discover the wide debate about it, and its history.  
 The failed legal moves that seem to have triggered removal of this page (while the number and title are widely propagated through Wikipedia and the web) are historically significant in their own right. As is the attempt to get Wikipedia to make the postings or numbers disappear (and thus make discussion or research about it harder to find), at the same time they are proliferating on various media, including T-shirts and internet domains, around the world. 
 The phenomenon of the now apparently unsuccessful attempt by a copy-maximalist industry body to use the US DMCA law to suppress a tiny string of digits is not a passing legal technicality, but an important moment in the struggle between various protagonists. 
 My preferred outcome would be something like re-opening the deletion review, and looking for a solution that was technically compliant with whatever part of the DMCA is actually applicable here, if any (ask for legal advice on this), but enabled perhaps a locked version of the page that referred people to a discussion page.  

 At present if you seek to go to  
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:09_F9_11_02_9D_74_E3_5B_D8_41_56_C5_63_56_88_C0  
 and click on the link at the ensuing pseudo-page you just get a 'deleted and locked' message. Better would be "deleted and locked, but go  to see the history".Thanks for your efforts. David —The preceding unsigned comment was added by   • . 

 :The preferable approach is a cautious one, given the risk involved and given that it's entirely possible to write an encyclopaedic article about the key and the controversy without actually using the numbers (HD DVD key controversy or something like that). The project doesn't suffer by not having the number, but there's a very real possibility that it will suffer by having the number.