On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 1:32 PM, Denny Vrandečić < [email protected]> wrote:
> 2013/8/27 Federico Leva (Nemo) <[email protected]> > > > Denny Vrandečić, 27/08/2013 11:39: > > > > That's like saying > >> "printing out an article of Wikipedia and giving it to a student is a > >> violation of net neutrality because we didn't print out the rest of the > >> Web > >> and gave it to them too". > >> > > > > This analogy doesn't work very well because the "we" here is most likely > > not an ISP and it's only ISP being subject to net neutrality. > > > > Nemo > > > > Exactly. Neither is Wikipedia Zero an ISP, which is why the analogy does > work. :) > > Denny > I'm rather amazed that I'm the one being called out by George Herbert for making "excessively legalistic rather than factually or morally based" remarks (which I find odd, and rather insulting at that. I don't think I made a legalistic argument anywhere, and indeed, law tends to be the last thing I consider in where we should stand on ethical issues). I find this reasoning to be rule lawyering. We're not the ISP violating net neutrality, no. It's the ISP's we actively work together with and strongly encourage. I now find myself in the somewhat uncomfortable position where I defend the position where I say that this isn't a black and white issue, and net neutrality does play a role, which makes it appear as if I think we are doing horrible, horrible things to the world by providing Wikipedia Zero. For clarity, that is not at all how I feel about the issue. > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list > [email protected] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe> > _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
