Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

Grazie! :) 2011/10/13 Federico Leva (Nemo) : > Nickanc Wikipedia, 12/10/2011 14:21: >> Yes, there are these groups, but in most wikipedias they have few >> persons inside it and they have almost no policy; > > That's because few people need it. > In it wiki basta una riga in [[WP:RA]], secondo me.

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

Nickanc Wikipedia, 12/10/2011 14:21: > Yes, there are these groups, but in most wikipedias they have few > persons inside it and they have almost no policy; That's because few people need it. In it wiki basta una riga in [[WP:RA]], secondo me. > moreover if you look > for global ipblock exempt yo

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

Yes, there are these groups, but in most wikipedias they have few persons inside it and they have almost no policy; moreover if you look for global ipblock exempt you may found that they are still vulnerable to IP and IP range blocks made locally on individual wikis (http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

Nickanc Wikipedia, 10/10/2011 22:59: > Why dont allow Ip block exemptions for TOR when > wikipedians are strongly biased by local laws? This is already possible on all wikis with ipblock-exempt group and is/was used mainly for Chinese wikipedians AFAIK. Everybody happily editing on clandestinity

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

> Ilario writes: > > > We have two ways: to be passive or to be active. If we choose the > > passivity, it means that we can only organize a system of proxies like > > done in China or to organize some workarounds to make Wikipedia > > available to the person living in totalitarism. > > > > The Ita

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 4:03 AM, Mike Godwin wrote: > Again, speaking only for myself, I believe the Italian Wikimedians > made the right choice, and I believe that, so long as this tactic is > not overused, a strike may be the best and most effective response to > other anti-free-speech events in

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

Ilario writes: > We have two ways: to be passive or to be active. If we choose the > passivity, it means that we can only organize a system of proxies like > done in China or to organize some workarounds to make Wikipedia > available to the person living in totalitarism. > > The Italian community

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On 08.10.2011 11:11, Ray Saintonge wrote: > > I'm happy that the Italian language Wikipedia is back in business, and I > hope that in the future projects will find better ways to protest than > suicide strategies. The key point is that Wikipedias are based on > languages, not countries. For Italia

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 12:44 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote: > Ray Saintonge, 08/10/2011 11:11: >> I'm happy that the Italian language Wikipedia is back in business, and I >> hope that in the future projects will find better ways to protest than >> suicide strategies.  The key point is that Wikipe

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

Ray Saintonge, 08/10/2011 11:11: > I'm happy that the Italian language Wikipedia is back in business, and I > hope that in the future projects will find better ways to protest than > suicide strategies. The key point is that Wikipedias are based on > languages, not countries. For Italian there is

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On 10/06/11 6:33 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote: > Thomas Morton, 05/10/2011 12:31: >> On 5 October 2011 11:20, church.of.emacs.ml >>> Are you seriously comparing that italien law to the proposed image filter? >>> >>> Are you aware of the principle of proportionality? What might be okay to >>> do a

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

Thomas Morton, 05/10/2011 12:31: > On 5 October 2011 11:20, church.of.emacs.ml >> Are you seriously comparing that italien law to the proposed image filter? >> >> Are you aware of the principle of proportionality? What might be okay to >> do against a law that would kill Wikipedia is different from

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

I mean Wikipedia (or websites like Wikipedia) specific. Italian text will have to do - Google translate does miracles :) I think what would be really great is a set of statements/suggestions, so not just by one expert. For one, the Rodotà statement was not exactly what I was looking for at some po

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

Thomas Goldammer, 05/10/2011 09:21: > 2011/10/5 Samuel Klein: >> >> CLPI has a good practical summary of the law in this area: >> http://www.clpi.org/the-law/faq > > interesting: > > Q. If a charity incorporated in this country has an Australian (for > example) affiliate that lobbies (according t

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

Lodewijk, 06/10/2011 14:24: > No dia 6 de Outubro de 2011 14:01, Federico Leva (Nemo) > escreveu: > >> This doesn't mean that we've misinformed users: prominent jurists agree >> that the proposed law is absolutely crazy for Wikipedia and other >> websites; and the community had discussed and assess

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

No dia 6 de Outubro de 2011 14:01, Federico Leva (Nemo) escreveu: > This doesn't mean that we've misinformed users: prominent jurists agree > that the proposed law is absolutely crazy for Wikipedia and other > websites; and the community had discussed and assessed the effects of > the proposed law

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

Andreas Kolbe, 05/10/2011 12:49: > Even this corrected version does not seem to be right. As I understand the > proposed law, > the subject would have the right for a statement to be shown, unaltered, on > the page (which > actually would be possible for Wikipedia to do, via a transcluded and >

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On 6 October 2011 12:49, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote: > But all users would need to do so, because a random user or sysop could > be asked to publish the correction/statement. On wiki there was a > discussion about how to globally implement such a switch to clandestine > accounts... Personally s

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

Ray Saintonge, 05/10/2011 10:46: > If they are so fearful they can use pseudonyms. They would then need to > get a legal order from a US court to identify the users. But all users would need to do so, because a random user or sysop could be asked to publish the correction/statement. On wiki ther

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

Thomas Morton, 05/10/2011 00:23: > I'm still a little bit confused how this will impact Wikipedia, though. > > The law seems to be clear in identifying the website owner as the person to > contact; which is a US not-for-profit. Which law? And which law speaks of website owner? Anyone can be asked

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

Andreas Kolbe, 06/10/2011 02:11: > Well, that *is* nuts. Moreover, the 48-hour time period and potential €12,000 > fine in the > proposed law are nuts (pity the blogger who has gone on a 2-week holiday). > Yet that > €12,000 fine is not mentioned in the it:WP statement. Being forced to include >

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

On 10/05/11 11:04 AM, Andreas Kolbe wrote: > > Speaking as a citizen of a country with a fairly stringently worded > "Right of reply law." I don't think it has ever been applied against > an encyclopaedia, or a blog or Usenet thread or anything remotely like > that. I think it is very cogently only

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

On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 3:11 AM, Andreas Kolbe wrote: > --- On Wed, 5/10/11, Andrea Zanni wrote: > > From: Andrea Zanni > Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia - What exactly does > the proposed law say? > To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"

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

--- On Wed, 5/10/11, Andrea Zanni wrote: From: Andrea Zanni Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia - What exactly does the proposed law say? To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" Date: Wednesday, 5 October, 2011, 22:44 > Given that a Wikipedia biography i

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

Domas writes: > Except that WMF as steward of the open information can roll any of that > blackout crap back. > Primary mission is spreading the knowledge, and now it.wikipedia obviously > fails at it. I believe this interpretation is both unfair and incorrect. The Italian Wikipedians are tryin

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

> Given that a Wikipedia biography is usually the first google hit to come up > for a name, it > doesn't actually strike me as *that* ludicrous. What Wikipedia writes about a > person reaches > more readers today than a New York Times article. As someone else mentioned > recently, > there is a r

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On 10/04/11 3:14 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote: > 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

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 10:52 PM, Jalo wrote: > To me, it works. Which browser are you using? Firefox 7.0.1 on OS X 10.6.6, not logged into anything. Austin ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikim

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 9:47 PM, The Cunctator wrote: > On 10/4/11, Mathias Schindler wrote: >> How many inches are we away from keeping a list of politicians and >> parties we endorse in national, state and regional elections? > > That's stupid. I think that was his point. Austin _

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

> > I wasn't logged in, to begin with. I was looking at it as any casual > reader would. > > Austin > To me, it works. Which browser are you using? ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/ma

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 9:36 PM, Ilario Valdelli wrote: > Make a logout and after make a new login. I wasn't logged in, to begin with. I was looking at it as any casual reader would. Austin ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

That's stupid. On 10/4/11, Mathias Schindler wrote: > 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 hopi

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On 05.10.2011 20:43, Austin Hair wrote: > On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 2:46 PM, Theo10011 wrote: >> There seems to be a situation developing at Italian Wikipedia related to a >> local law that would infringe neutrality on Wikipedia. The discussions even >> mention a possible blackout/lockdown in reactio

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 2:46 PM, Theo10011 wrote: > There seems to be a situation developing at Italian Wikipedia related to a > local law that would infringe neutrality on Wikipedia. The discussions even > mention a possible blackout/lockdown in reaction. Currently, anything I try to access at it

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

--- On Wed, 5/10/11, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote: From: Jussi-Ville Heiskanen Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia - What exactly does the proposed law say? To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" Date: Wednesday, 5 October, 2011, 12:16 On Wed, Oct 5, 2011

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

--- On Wed, 5/10/11, Jalo wrote: From: Jalo Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia - What exactly does the proposed law say? To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" Date: Wednesday, 5 October, 2011, 12:40 > > the subject would have the right for a state

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

2011/10/5 Michael Snow > On 10/5/2011 9:45 AM, emijrp wrote: > > 2011/10/5 Michael Snow > >> On 10/5/2011 7:03 AM, Domas Mituzas wrote: > >>> Editor strike means not editing, it doesn't mean full service downtime. > >> When labor unions go on strike, they do more than not show up for work. > >> T

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On 10/5/2011 9:45 AM, emijrp wrote: > 2011/10/5 Michael Snow >> On 10/5/2011 7:03 AM, Domas Mituzas wrote: >>> Editor strike means not editing, it doesn't mean full service downtime. >> When labor unions go on strike, they do more than not show up for work. >> They form picket lines and take other

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

2011/10/5 Michael Snow > On 10/5/2011 7:03 AM, Domas Mituzas wrote: > >> The only thing we truly could do is restore read access. But if the > >> it.wikipedia community really wants to strike, there's very little we > >> can do to stop them. :) > > I sure agree with that. There're plenty of ways

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On 10/5/2011 7:03 AM, Domas Mituzas wrote: >> The only thing we truly could do is restore read access. But if the >> it.wikipedia community really wants to strike, there's very little we >> can do to stop them. :) > I sure agree with that. There're plenty of ways to inflict pain without > terminat

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

I am sure other people can fill in, but I heard there has been some movement within the parliament in reaction. They are reconsidering a portion of that law that might affect us, or so I have been told. http://www.rainews24.rai.it/it/news.php?newsid=157111 Can someone clarify? Regards Theo On

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

> Of late I've often round reasons to be critical of the choices the WMF has > made, but in this case you've made the best choice possible - supporting the > community on it.wikipedia in a decision that they've come to as a group, > even though that decision is controversial in some places.  Bravo

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

Of all the ways to protest the law, I think it.wp chose the most noticeable way. If something like a sitenotice were implemented, many people would just scroll past it. Even if not, they would only read it a couple times, because people access Wikipedia for the content. OTOH, just locking Edi

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 16:03, Domas Mituzas wrote: > When writers guild went on strike, we could still watch old stuff, right, it > wasn't pulled ;-) > If doctors go on strike, people are still allowed to live, retroactive > disease correction is not done... When truck drivers go on strike in F

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

> The only thing we truly could do is restore read access. But if the > it.wikipedia community really wants to strike, there's very little we > can do to stop them. :) I sure agree with that. There're plenty of ways to inflict pain without terminating the service entirely. Editor strike means no

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 4:00 AM, Domas Mituzas wrote: > Except that WMF as steward of the open information can roll any of that > blackout crap back. The only thing we truly could do is restore read access. But if the it.wikipedia community really wants to strike, there's very little we can do to

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

2011/10/5 David Richfield : > On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 1:00 PM, Domas Mituzas wrote: >>> Regardless, what's done is done, for >>> the moment. >> >> Except that WMF as steward of the open information can roll any of that >> blackout crap back. >> Primary mission is spreading the knowledge, and now i

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

> Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2011 13:58:51 -0700 > From: Sue Gardner > Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia > To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List > > Message-ID: > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > The Wikimedia Fo

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

> > the subject would have the right for a statement to be shown, unaltered, on > the page (which > actually would be possible for Wikipedia to do, via a transcluded and > protected template). I think not. The transcluded template can be deleted from the article, if you don't block the article it

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 1:00 PM, Domas Mituzas wrote: >> Regardless, what's done is done, for >> the moment. > > Except that WMF as steward of the open information can roll any of that > blackout crap back. > Primary mission is spreading the knowledge, and now it.wikipedia obviously > fails at it

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

> > Except that WMF as steward of the open information can roll any of that > blackout crap back. > > Domas > There's no need to be so drastic. If WMF wishes the block to be removed, it simply can ask it and we'll do. In a couple of minutes. We're not moving war against WMF. Howerer, at the momen

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

On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 2:05 PM, Milos Rancic wrote: > On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 12:49, Andreas Kolbe wrote: >> Even this corrected version does not seem to be right. As I understand the >> proposed law, >> the subject would have the right for a statement to be shown, unaltered, on >> the page (whi

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

On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 12:49, Andreas Kolbe wrote: > Even this corrected version does not seem to be right. As I understand the > proposed law, > the subject would have the right for a statement to be shown, unaltered, on > the page (which > actually would be possible for Wikipedia to do, via a

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

> Regardless, what's done is done, for > the moment. Except that WMF as steward of the open information can roll any of that blackout crap back. Primary mission is spreading the knowledge, and now it.wikipedia obviously fails at it. Domas ___ foundat

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

Mark-Weiss-in-disgrace-after-admitting-poison-pen-campaign-against-rival-Philip-Mould.html [3] http://blog.wikimedia.org/2011/10/04/regarding-recent-events-on-italian-wikipedia/ [4] http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jul/09/silvio-berlusconi-media-gag-lawAndreas   --- On Wed, 5/10/11, John Vandenberg

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On 5 October 2011 11:20, church.of.emacs.ml < church.of.emacs...@googlemail.com> wrote: > On 10/05/2011 06:25 AM, Aaron Adrignola wrote: > > 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 >

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On 10/05/2011 06:25 AM, Aaron Adrignola wrote: > 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. S

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On 10/05/11 2:06 AM, Béria Lima wrote: > Not really Ray. And even so, the problem is not the fear of getting > arrested, is more the cost of a law suit. In Italy (as in some other Latin > countries) law suits are expensive (really, REALLY expensives) and take > forever to end. Lawsuits can be expe

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

Am 05.10.2011 10:46, schrieb Ray Saintonge: > On 10/04/11 6:03 AM, Ilario Valdelli wrote: >> The question is that the server are in USA, but for the penal law it's >> sufficient to edit from the Italian country. >> >> I am in a special situation because I live in Switzerland and I >> publish in USA

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

Not really Ray. And even so, the problem is not the fear of getting arrested, is more the cost of a law suit. In Italy (as in some other Latin countries) law suits are expensive (really, REALLY expensives) and take forever to end. _ *Béria Lima* (351) 925 171 484 *Imagine

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

On 10/04/11 6:03 AM, Ilario Valdelli wrote: > The question is that the server are in USA, but for the penal law it's > sufficient to edit from the Italian country. > > I am in a special situation because I live in Switzerland and I > publish in USA servers, but for the main numbers of Italian edito

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

You heard about consensus and anti-censorship actions: all is allowed with community polls as seen in Italian Wikipedia yesterday. German Wikipedia, go ahead and blank your wiki is WMF try to force the image filtering on you. The same for other Wikipedias that don't agree with the filter. Enjoy th

Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia

2011/10/5 Samuel Klein : > > CLPI has a good practical summary of the law in this area: >  http://www.clpi.org/the-law/faq interesting: Q. If a charity incorporated in this country has an Australian (for example) affiliate that lobbies (according to United States definitions of lobbying) and the

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. >

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] 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] 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?

: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia - What exactly does the proposed law say? To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" Date: Tuesday, 4 October, 2011, 22:42 http://www.camera.it/_dati/leg16/lavori/stampati/pdf/16PDL0038530.pdf Page 24. On 4 October 2011 22:40, Andreas Ko

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] 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] 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

force an editor to publish a rebuttal of something posted before the freeze, then surely that would be retrospective legislation? WereSpielChequers > Message: 7 > Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2011 18:00:25 +0200 > From: Jalo > Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia > To

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

indication of the relevant section or paragraph, would be much > appreciated. > Andreas > > --- On Tue, 4/10/11, Risker wrote: > > From: Risker > Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia > To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" > Date: Tue

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

n the page, *in addition* to the disputed content? I can read some Italian; a link to the proposed text of the new law, along with an indication of the relevant section or paragraph, would be much appreciated. Andreas  --- On Tue, 4/10/11, Risker wrote: From: Risker Subject: Re: [Foundation-l

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] 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] 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] 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] 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

  1   2   >