Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia - What exactly does the proposed law say?

On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote: > John Vandenberg, 05/10/2011 00:16: >> On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 8:42 AM, Thomas Morton >>  wrote: >>> http://www.camera.it/_dati/leg16/lavori/stampati/pdf/16PDL0038530.pdf >> >> Is this public domain? >> >> If it is, we can put it on Ital

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

Am 05.10.2011 06:25, schrieb Aaron Adrignola: > Should I expect that de.wikipedia would be allowed to stage > a similar "blackout" should the image filter be implemented against their > wishes, with the goal of protesting perceived or potential censorship? You can pretty much count on that. And wha

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

I'm sure those on this list are familiar with the de.wikipedia poll on the proposed image filter with its strong outcome on a particular side of the debate. I am quite concerned about the precedent that it.wikipedia is being allowed to set. Should I expect that de.wikipedia would be allowed to st

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

There is a petition with over 1430 signatures in 24 hours http://twitter.com/#!/jayvdb/status/121435650057707520 -- John Vandenberg ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 8:21 PM, Mark wrote: > On 10/5/11 1:50 AM, Ryan Kaldari wrote: > > The WMF isn't allowed to lobby for or against legislation, per our 501c3 > > non-profit status in the US. This is not necessarily true for chapters > > though, and definitely not true for the communities. >

[Foundation-l] WMF blog post on Italian Wikipedia

Hi folks - apologies for starting a new thread on this topic... We've just posted a short blog post on the topic of the unfolding issues around Italian Wikipedia http://blog.wikimedia.org/2011/10/04/regarding-recent-events-on-italian-wikipedia/ We've had a few calls to WMF - not many, and we've

Re: [Foundation-l] Dead Sea Scrolls

On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 2:09 PM, Ryan Kaldari wrote: > On 10/4/11 8:16 AM, Anthony wrote: >> If WMF wants to copy *the text* of the scrolls, I don't think anyone >> is going to have a problem with that.  The copyright notice claims >> copyright "in the digital images of the manuscripts", not in the

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

Mark wrote: > On 10/5/11 1:50 AM, Ryan Kaldari wrote: >> The WMF isn't allowed to lobby for or against legislation, per our >> 501c3 non-profit status in the US. This is not necessarily true for >> chapters though, and definitely not true for the communities. >> > Somewhat true, but not a red line.

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 10:56 AM, Thomas Goldammer wrote: > 2011/10/5 Ryan Kaldari : >> The WMF isn't allowed to lobby for or against legislation, per our 501c3 >> non-profit status in the US. This is not necessarily true for chapters >> though, and definitely not true for the communities. >> >> Ry

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 6:26 PM, John Vandenberg wrote: > Is this the first time that WMF has actively taken a stance on > politics and legislation? No. Well, in this case, really, Wikimedia hasn't acted except to observe, though several individuals have stated opinions. But Wikimedia has acted

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On 10/5/11 1:50 AM, Ryan Kaldari wrote: > The WMF isn't allowed to lobby for or against legislation, per our 501c3 > non-profit status in the US. This is not necessarily true for chapters > though, and definitely not true for the communities. > Somewhat true, but not a red line. The IRS gives this

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

2011/10/5 Ryan Kaldari : > The WMF isn't allowed to lobby for or against legislation, per our 501c3 > non-profit status in the US. This is not necessarily true for chapters > though, and definitely not true for the communities. > > Ryan Kaldari not for/against the US legislation, that means? Or wo

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

The WMF isn't allowed to lobby for or against legislation, per our 501c3 non-profit status in the US. This is not necessarily true for chapters though, and definitely not true for the communities. Ryan Kaldari On 10/4/11 4:33 PM, Thomas Goldammer wrote: > 2011/10/5 John Vandenberg: >> The WMF i

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

2011/10/5 John Vandenberg : > The WMF is very unlikely to approve of this, as that would be > influencing legislation. > Why should the WMF not (at least try to) influence legislation if that helps the goal of distributing free knowledge? I think it should do exactly that, whenever possible and su

Re: [Foundation-l] Blog from Sue about censorship, editorial judgement, and image filters

The huge problem here seems to be that the argument is being framed in terms of editorial judgement, but the means seems to the thinking public aimed at sidestepping editorial judgement by supposedly giving a viewing public more choice, but infact enabling gatekeepers when they want to keep you fro

Re: [Foundation-l] Blanking a Wikipedia, a very bad idea

Editors aren't the only people who use Wikipedia. 2011/10/4 Jalo > > > > Is the Kiribati based community (or a part of it) of Wikipedians allowed > > to block en.wikipedia.org for x hours because a new Kiribatian (sp?) > > media law might come? > > > > Mathias > > > > You're right, 2-3% of it.wi

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

Mike Godwin wrote: > Kat Walsh writes: > >> I am happy to see the Italian community behind the opposition to the >> proposed law because I do think it's contrary to what Wikimedia does, >> and to see that there is consensus among the Italian community to do >> something drastic; there will be a far

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 12:53 AM, Mike Godwin wrote: > I agree entirely with Risker, and I want to applaud the WM RS Board > members for responding so quickly in support of the Italian > Wikimedians on this issue. Milos, I missed your board's public > statement -- can you send me a link so I can s

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

Milos writes: > On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 22:32, Risker wrote: >> (As an aside, kudos to Milos' rapid response and ability to organize his own >> local community in support of the concerns of our Italian counterparts.) > > Thanks! It should be noted that this the decision has been supported > by 100

Re: [Foundation-l] Blanking a Wikipedia, a very bad idea

On 10/04/2011 10:38 PM, Mathias Schindler wrote: > On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 22:32, Fred Bauder wrote: > >> No, it is a very good idea. The public needs to know what is at stake. It >> would be nice if it were otherwise, but most people only learn by >> experience. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

Kat Walsh writes: > I am happy to see the Italian community behind the opposition to the > proposed law because I do think it's contrary to what Wikimedia does, > and to see that there is consensus among the Italian community to do > something drastic; there will be a far greater effect on the Ita

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

The WMF has not taken a stance even at this - individuals at the WMF did, and the WMF did decide so far that it will not break the strike. That is something else than the WMF taking an active stance. Which it maybe should, maybe shouldn't (that depends on the wordings etc). Lodewijk No dia 5 de O

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia - What exactly does the proposed law say?

Thanks. As far as I can see, the document you link to enumerates proposed changes to an  existing law (the text of which is not given). The left column shows changes already  approved in 2009, and the right column shows additional modifications now to be voted on. So we read that after the thi

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 7:58 AM, Sue Gardner wrote: > The Wikimedia Foundation first heard about this a few hours ago: we don't > have a lot of details yet. Jay is gathering information and working on a > statement now. > > It seems obvious though that the proposed law would hurt freedom of > expre

Re: [Foundation-l] Blanking a Wikipedia, a very bad idea

On 10/4/11 11:20 PM, Jalo wrote: >> the de facto threshold is whatever allows them to get consensus and have an >> admin make the >> necessary changes and not be reverted > > You can see the consensus in > http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bar/Discussioni/Comma_29_e_Wikipedia > > I know, it's

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia - What exactly does the proposed law say?

John Vandenberg, 05/10/2011 00:16: > On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 8:42 AM, Thomas Morton > wrote: >> http://www.camera.it/_dati/leg16/lavori/stampati/pdf/16PDL0038530.pdf > > Is this public domain? > > If it is, we can put it on Italian Wikisource, annotate it and > translate it into other languages.

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On 4 October 2011 23:19, John Vandenberg wrote: > On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 7:15 AM, Neil Babbage wrote: > > Yes they are able to strike, but that still doesn't give them the right > > (legal or moral) to shut down property that doesn't belong to them. In > > any case, if the servers are located in

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 3:49 AM, John Vandenberg wrote: > On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 7:15 AM, Neil Babbage wrote: > > Yes they are able to strike, but that still doesn't give them the right > > (legal or moral) to shut down property that doesn't belong to them. In > > any case, if the servers are loc

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia - What exactly does the proposed law say?

On 4 October 2011 23:12, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote: > Andreas Kolbe, 04/10/2011 23:40: > > Is it that disputed content will have to be *removed* if a request is > received, and *replaced* with the BLP subject's statement? > > Or is it that BLP subjects have the right to ask for a correction to b

Re: [Foundation-l] Blanking a Wikipedia, a very bad idea

2011/10/4 emijrp > > Hi all; > > The events regarding Italian Wikipedia blanking[1][2] of all its content are > a serious precedent IMHO. They can make a lot of noise using other > procedures, like a big blinking site notice, but giving no choice to read > the content is against the main goal of W

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 7:15 AM, Neil Babbage wrote: > Yes they are able to strike, but that still doesn't give them the right > (legal or moral) to shut down property that doesn't belong to them. In > any case, if the servers are located in the US then US law applies to > their management. The WM

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia - What exactly does the proposed law say?

On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 8:42 AM, Thomas Morton wrote: > http://www.camera.it/_dati/leg16/lavori/stampati/pdf/16PDL0038530.pdf Is this public domain? If it is, we can put it on Italian Wikisource, annotate it and translate it into other languages. -- John Vandenberg

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

WereSpielChequers, 04/10/2011 23:46: > If someone tried to use this law > to > force an editor to publish a rebuttal of something posted before the > freeze, then surely that would be retrospective legislation? I don't see why. Web pages are permanent, they ask the correction/declaration to be p

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia - What exactly does the proposed law say?

Andreas Kolbe, 04/10/2011 23:40: > Is it that disputed content will have to be *removed* if a request is > received, and *replaced* with the BLP subject's statement? > Or is it that BLP subjects have the right to ask for a correction to be > posted on the page, *in addition* to the disputed conte

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 4:58 PM, Sue Gardner wrote: > The Wikimedia Foundation first heard about this a few hours ago: we don't > have a lot of details yet. Jay is gathering information and working on a > statement now. > > It seems obvious though that the proposed law would hurt freedom of > expre

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

Hi Jalo, Re "Italian police will get my name using my IP" it would be interesting to know whether the WMF or Google would give the Italian police an IP address in such circumstances. Perhaps someone from the Foundation could answer that one, and you might want to ask Google re your Gmail account.

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia - What exactly does the proposed law say?

http://www.camera.it/_dati/leg16/lavori/stampati/pdf/16PDL0038530.pdf Page 24. On 4 October 2011 22:40, Andreas Kolbe wrote: > I would echo Risker's question: What exactly does the proposed new law > say? > Is it that disputed content will have to be *removed* if a request is > received, and *r

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia - What exactly does the proposed law say?

I would echo Risker's question: What exactly does the proposed new law say?  Is it that disputed content will have to be *removed* if a request is received, and *replaced* with the BLP subject's statement? Or is it that BLP subjects have the right to ask for a correction to be posted on the page,

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

Thomas Morton, 04/10/2011 22:25: > Lengthy and critical email on why this is a flabbergasting response... Just replying to some bits. > - Have they had legal advice? From my semi-legal reading of the material > this is not something that will bite them, but that certainly needs to be > clarified.

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

Very hard times for Wikimedia Italia. This goes for you all, going on working under very hard conditions: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XXqYkQj1QC4 All my support. From the bottom of my heart. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.

Re: [Foundation-l] Blanking a Wikipedia, a very bad idea

> > FWIW because of the way this has been implemented, it is not (at least > obviously) possible to rollback/reverse via the web interface (it appears > to > be a change in common.js - and even that page redirects to the message). > > Tom > You can disable javascripts and css in your browser. For

Re: [Foundation-l] Blanking a Wikipedia, a very bad idea

> > the de facto threshold is whatever allows them to get consensus and have an > admin make the > necessary changes and not be reverted You can see the consensus in http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bar/Discussioni/Comma_29_e_Wikipedia I know, it's in italian and google translate sucks, bu

[Foundation-l] Fwd: Chapter program plans

Cross-posting to Foundation-L -- Forwarded message -- From: Barry Newstead Date: Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 1:47 PM Subject: Chapter program plans To: "Local Chapters, board and officers coordination (closed subscription)" Hi - I want to make you all aware that several chapters (AT,

Re: [Foundation-l] Blanking a Wikipedia, a very bad idea

On 4 October 2011 22:15, Benjamin Lees wrote: > On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 5:10 PM, Mathias Schindler > wrote: > > Then can you specify the threshold for the community-ratio that is in > > your opinion required for some Wikipedians to vandalize a language > > edition of Wikipedia in such way? > > Un

Re: [Foundation-l] Blanking a Wikipedia, a very bad idea

> On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 23:08, Jalo wrote: > >> You're right, 2-3% of it.wikip users live outside of Italy, but this >> new law >> will affect every page in which a user that live in Italy save a single >> page >> version (that is 100% of articles). > > Then can you specify the threshold for the

Re: [Foundation-l] Blanking a Wikipedia, a very bad idea

On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 5:10 PM, Mathias Schindler wrote: > Then can you specify the threshold for the community-ratio that is in > your opinion required for some Wikipedians to vandalize a language > edition of Wikipedia in such way? Unless the WMF decides it should intervene, the de facto thresh

Re: [Foundation-l] Blanking a Wikipedia, a very bad idea

> On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 22:55, M. Williamson wrote: >> Another important point here is that Wikipedia is an international >> project; > > No, this is not another important point, this is exactly my point. Is > the Kiribati based community (or a part of it) of Wikipedians allowed > to block en.wik

Re: [Foundation-l] Blanking a Wikipedia, a very bad idea

They should be enough, to convice the rest of the community. And when Kiribati users are actually able to convince all the others on en, then: Go Kiribati! Go! southpark On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 11:10 PM, Mathias Schindler < mathias.schind...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 23:08, Jalo

Re: [Foundation-l] Blanking a Wikipedia, a very bad idea

> > Then can you specify the threshold for the community-ratio that is in > your opinion required for some Wikipedians to vandalize a language > edition of Wikipedia in such way? > I've already told that: 100% of articles. Do you need a larger threshold? ___

Re: [Foundation-l] Blanking a Wikipedia, a very bad idea

On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 23:08, Jalo wrote: > You're right, 2-3% of it.wikip users live outside of Italy, but this new law > will affect every page in which a user that live in Italy save a single page > version (that is 100% of articles). Then can you specify the threshold for the community-ratio

Re: [Foundation-l] Blanking a Wikipedia, a very bad idea

> > Is the Kiribati based community (or a part of it) of Wikipedians allowed > to block en.wikipedia.org for x hours because a new Kiribatian (sp?) > media law might come? > > Mathias > You're right, 2-3% of it.wikip users live outside of Italy, but this new law will affect every page in which a u

Re: [Foundation-l] Blanking a Wikipedia, a very bad idea

On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 22:58, Mathias Schindler wrote: > On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 22:55, M. Williamson wrote: >> Another important point here is that Wikipedia is an international project; > > No, this is not another important point, this is exactly my point. Is > the Kiribati based community (or a

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

The Wikimedia Foundation first heard about this a few hours ago: we don't have a lot of details yet. Jay is gathering information and working on a statement now. It seems obvious though that the proposed law would hurt freedom of expression in Italy, and therefore it's entirely reasonable for the

Re: [Foundation-l] Blanking a Wikipedia, a very bad idea

On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 22:55, M. Williamson wrote: > Another important point here is that Wikipedia is an international project; No, this is not another important point, this is exactly my point. Is the Kiribati based community (or a part of it) of Wikipedians allowed to block en.wikipedia.org fo

Re: [Foundation-l] Blanking a Wikipedia, a very bad idea

Another important point here is that Wikipedia is an international project; there are speakers of Italian in Switzerland, Brazil, Argentina, Mexico, and in smaller numbers in lots of other countries who may not care so much what happens in Italian politics. If the UK proposed a new law to shut down

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 22:32, Risker wrote: > (As an aside, kudos to Milos' rapid response and ability to organize his own > local community in support of the concerns of our Italian counterparts.) Thanks! It should be noted that this the decision has been supported by 100% of WM RS Board members

Re: [Foundation-l] Blanking a Wikipedia, a very bad idea

On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 22:32, Fred Bauder wrote: > No, it is a very good idea. The public needs to know what is at stake. It > would be nice if it were otherwise, but most people only learn by > experience. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_where_English_is_an_official_language make

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

Rather than try to respond to a specific post in this fast moving thread, my belief is that the WMF is likely trying to work directly with members of the Italian Wikipedia community primarily right now rather than keeping up with mailing lists. While I do look forward to seeing some communication

Re: [Foundation-l] Blanking a Wikipedia, a very bad idea

> Hi all; > > The events regarding Italian Wikipedia blanking[1][2] of all its content > are > a serious precedent IMHO. They can make a lot of noise using other > procedures, like a big blinking site notice, but giving no choice to read > the content is against the main goal of Wikipedia.[3] > > I

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

> > Whoever has locked out access to it.wikipedia.org should be immediately > desysopped under emergency procedures We knew about this danger. But in the case, you have to desysop many of us. The responsible is not only the one who edited the page, but all of us that agreed on the strike

[Foundation-l] Blanking a Wikipedia, a very bad idea

Hi all; The events regarding Italian Wikipedia blanking[1][2] of all its content are a serious precedent IMHO. They can make a lot of noise using other procedures, like a big blinking site notice, but giving no choice to read the content is against the main goal of Wikipedia.[3] Italian Wikipedia

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On 04.10.2011 22:19, Nathan wrote: > On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 4:15 PM, teun spaans wrote: >> Isn't this premature? As I understand, the law is still being discussed, not >> yet in affect. >> > It's a protest, they are hoping to influence whether the law is passed or not. > > ~Nathan When you write

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

> > In any case, if the servers are located in the US then US law applies to > their management. > No. Italian citizens that operates wiki (uses a pc) in Italy must follow both italian and US law Jalo ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wik

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

Lengthy and critical email on why this is a flabbergasting response... At this time we now have a Wikipedia taking a political position, and indeed political action. In essence they have made an operational decision and abused their autonomy as a Wikipedia within the foundation. Don't get me wron

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 22:19, Nathan wrote: > On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 4:15 PM, teun spaans wrote: >> Isn't this premature? As I understand, the law is still being discussed, not >> yet in affect. >> > > It's a protest, they are hoping to influence whether the law is passed or not. How many inches

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

> > Isn't this premature? As I understand, the law is still being discussed, > not > yet in affect. > If the law passes, it'll be too late ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/lis

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 22:15, Neil Babbage wrote: > Yes they are able to strike, but that still doesn't give them the right > (legal or moral) to shut down property that doesn't belong to them. In > any case, if the servers are located in the US then US law applies to > their management. You are

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 4:15 PM, teun spaans wrote: > Isn't this premature? As I understand, the law is still being discussed, not > yet in affect. > It's a protest, they are hoping to influence whether the law is passed or not. ~Nathan ___ foundation-

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

Isn't this premature? As I understand, the law is still being discussed, not yet in affect. On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 9:37 PM, Theo10011 wrote: > For those not following, Italian Wikipedia went into lockdown a while ago. > All content and pages direct to the notice. > > http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

Yes they are able to strike, but that still doesn't give them the right (legal or moral) to shut down property that doesn't belong to them. In any case, if the servers are located in the US then US law applies to their management. On 04/10/2011 21:02, Milos Rancic wrote: > On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 a

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

The redirect is not working properly on the secure website. Go to https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/it/wiki/Wikipedia:Comunicato_4_ottobre_2011 and then hit random page https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/it/wiki/Speciale:PaginaCasuale that takes the reader to: https://secure.wikimedia

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 1:35 AM, Thomas Morton wrote: > This is going to be a PR nightmare :-s > > Tom Morton > > On 4 Oct 2011, at 20:58, Aaron Adrignola > wrote: > > > Whoever has locked out access to it.wikipedia.org should be immediately > > desysopped under emergency procedures. This site is

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

This is going to be a PR nightmare :-s Tom Morton On 4 Oct 2011, at 20:58, Aaron Adrignola wrote: > Whoever has locked out access to it.wikipedia.org should be immediately > desysopped under emergency procedures. This site is run by the Wikimedia > Foundation and I've seen no authorization by

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 21:58, Aaron Adrignola wrote: > Whoever has locked out access to it.wikipedia.org should be immediately > desysopped under emergency procedures.  This site is run by the Wikimedia > Foundation and I've seen no authorization by the WMF for the vandalism of > one of its websit

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

Whoever has locked out access to it.wikipedia.org should be immediately desysopped under emergency procedures. This site is run by the Wikimedia Foundation and I've seen no authorization by the WMF for the vandalism of one of its websites. ___ foundation

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

One in English: http://www.businessinsider.com/italy-wikipedia-wiretapping-2011-10 On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 21:57, Theo10011 wrote: > On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 1:22 AM, Nathan wrote: > >> On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 3:37 PM, Theo10011 wrote: >> > For those not following, Italian Wikipedia went into lockd

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 1:22 AM, Nathan wrote: > On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 3:37 PM, Theo10011 wrote: > > For those not following, Italian Wikipedia went into lockdown a while > ago. > > All content and pages direct to the notice. > > > > http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Comunicato_4_ottobre_20

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 3:37 PM, Theo10011 wrote: > For those not following, Italian Wikipedia went into lockdown a while ago. > All content and pages direct to the notice. > > http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Comunicato_4_ottobre_2011 > > Regards > Theo > > Any news coverage?

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

For those not following, Italian Wikipedia went into lockdown a while ago. All content and pages direct to the notice. http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Comunicato_4_ottobre_2011 Regards Theo On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 1:02 AM, Mathias Schindler < mathias.schind...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue,

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 14:56, Tomasz Ganicz wrote: > 2011/10/4 Thomas Morton : >> I think this is a prime opportunity to point out to those concerned: >> Wikipedia is hosted in the US :) so no need to worry! >> > > Are you sure? Contributors lives mainly in Italy, so they have to > follow Italian

Re: [Foundation-l] Dead Sea Scrolls

Hi, Gerard. I supose you know what is paleography. And therefore you know that there is an intrinsic value in a raw manuscript, which provides information about schools of calligraphy, styles... an ancient manuscript is something like a painting masterpiece. All those things can't be transmitted b

[Foundation-l] Wikimedia Serbia statement on recent events around Italian Wikipedia

Wikimedia Serbia supports Italian Wikipedians in denouncing the proposed law in the Italian Senate known as the "Wiretapping Act" and its paragraph 29, which undermines the free speech standards of our civilization. Wikimedia Serbia fully supports the protest of Italian Wikipedians and hopes that

Re: [Foundation-l] Dead Sea Scrolls

On 10/4/11 8:16 AM, Anthony wrote: > If WMF wants to copy *the text* of the scrolls, I don't think anyone > is going to have a problem with that. The copyright notice claims > copyright "in the digital images of the manuscripts", not in the text. Well, there doesn't appear to be any basis for a c

Re: [Foundation-l] Dead Sea Scrolls

2011/10/4 Anthony : > On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Anthony wrote: >> On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 7:56 PM, Ryan Kaldari wrote: >>> None of the >>> discussions of the Qimron case seem to mention the issue of date of >>> publication. The argument seems to have hinged almost entirely on the >>> issue

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

Jalo, 04/10/2011 18:04: > Not at all! In the italian laws, if you bring lawsuit against me for > defamation, you must prove I'm not saying the truth. Not really: freedom of press/expression is not so broad in Italy, there's no "exceptio veritatis" (in short truth is not important) for "diffamazi

[Foundation-l] Subject: Re: Dead Sea Scrolls

On 10/4/2011 9:04 AM, foundation-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org wrote: >>> issue of originality. >> > >> > The Qimron case is completely irrelevant with regard to the copyright >> > of the images. ?It is a case about the*text*. > If WMF wants to copy*the text* of the scrolls, I don't think anyone

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

A couple of English articles on the new law: Also, I'm not involved in the strike, but the WMF has been somehow informed by the

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

> > Much easier to sue under standard defamation laws (which we are under risk > of daily anyway!). > Not at all! In the italian laws, if you bring lawsuit against me for defamation, you must prove I'm not saying the truth. With this law you can bring lawsuit against me simply 'cause I've not pub

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

Thomas Morton, 04/10/2011 15:23: > In the modern world countries love to try it on and apply their internet > laws across the world. Fortunately courts tend to give that short shrift. 48 h deadline for correction and fines don't need a court; nor does the police to summon and interrogate a sysop

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

> > Does the proposed law say who is responsible for compliance? I would be > surprised if it was anyone other than the WMF. Legally speaking, we're all > just users of the website Maybe you're right, but it's not so obvious. [Sorry for my english] There is a lawsuit opened by a person against WM

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

> > Does the proposed law say who is responsible for compliance? I would > be surprised if it was anyone other than the WMF. The website owner (it's very clear over this), the website owner is also directly responsible for non-compliance. Legally speaking, > we're all just users of the website.

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On 4 October 2011 14:12, Donaldo Papero wrote: > Hello, > > Here are the facts: the Italian parliament will discuss within few days – > and most likely approve – a law which, among the other things, will > introduce the duty, for every web site (included, and not limited to, > Wikipedia) to publis

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

Hi, Wikipedia is a promise, that promise is "free knowledge at all time". By locking read access, you break that promise, you destroy part of the trust that our readers have in Wikipedia. In order to get the readers attention, it seems equally efficient to me to have a huge sitenotice, but withou

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 16:03, Milos Rancic wrote: > I think that Wikimedians should give response on that: > * Writing emails and letters to Italian embassies in your country. (I > will email them immediately.) > * Demonstrate -- 5 people are enough -- in front of embassy in your country. > * If y

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 5:01 PM, Nathan wrote: > On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 10:48 AM, Ilario Valdelli wrote: >> >> >> The question is that all Internet people in Italy is having strike >> because the project of law can be stopped if not approved. If it will >> be approved, it's harder to do something.

Re: [Foundation-l] Dead Sea Scrolls

On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Anthony wrote: > On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 7:56 PM, Ryan Kaldari wrote: >> None of the >> discussions of the Qimron case seem to mention the issue of date of >> publication. The argument seems to have hinged almost entirely on the >> issue of originality. > > The Qim

Re: [Foundation-l] Dead Sea Scrolls

On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 7:56 PM, Ryan Kaldari wrote: > On 10/3/11 4:36 PM, John Vandenberg wrote: >> On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 5:34 AM, Ryan Kaldari  wrote: >>> I think we are fairly safe hosting the images of the original fragments, >>> even by Israeli law. Israel does not recognize "sweat of the bro

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 10:48 AM, Ilario Valdelli wrote: > > > The question is that all Internet people in Italy is having strike > because the project of law can be stopped if not approved. If it will > be approved, it's harder to do something. > > It means that any action must be done now. > > Il

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 3:40 PM, Nathan wrote: > On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 9:12 AM, Donaldo Papero wrote: >> Hello, >> >> Here are the facts: the Italian parliament will discuss within few days – >> and most likely approve – a law which, among the other things, will >> introduce the duty, for every w

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

> > One has to wonder how the "community" will be able to discuss unlocking the > project if the project is locked. > > Risker > i.e., we can leave unlocked the village pump Jalo ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe

  1   2   >