Let’s just ignore whether there’s any moral or ethical arguments about legal compliance: What law is this man complying with? This is not a law that governs him. He is volunteering, and not compelled. There is no sanctity of law at play here.
That simply is not what people want when they look for information.
Well, except for those who do. The problem is a use case mismatch. I’d argue, if anything, an encyclopedia should contain the minutiae. Unfortunately, there’s no huge compendium of brief but accurate and sourced synopsis of the same topics. To be fair, we’ve never really had one.
I agree with the editors that embedded AI summaries are not a good idea (at the moment, at least). Users can bring summarizers to the data set of that’s their want, or someone (maybe even wikimedia) will find a way to provide this in a way that preserves the underlying data’s validity. Stripping Wikipedia of its full context seems like a bad idea.
There’s no subtext. This man has no obligation to this law, so “How dare this person follow the law. ;(” isn’t relevant. This man is not following a law, he is simply going about his day. He is volunteering, and not compelled. There is no sanctity of law at play here.
But, to play ball, yes. If a person who would otherwise receive punishment were to do this, I would take that into account. That is not the case here.