So, if someone tries to sue WM in the UK, successfully or
otherwise, WM's plan is to... ignore it?
Fascinating.
On 27/09/2007, Andrew Gray <shimgray(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 27/09/2007, Armed Blowfish
<diodontida.armata(a)googlemail.com> wrote:
I know.
That is why I included the words meaningful sense. The
foundation has no assets UK courts can get their hands on thus
anyjudgement is going to have very little practical effect.
How exactly does a large organisation plan to hide from the world?
It doesn't have to hide from the world, it just has to not have any
assets in the United Kingdom. This is not particularly difficult so
long as you don't have a habit of getting drunk and playing "let's buy
a new office, someone throw a pin at the map to find out where", and
I think we can reasonably assume we're safe from that.
A non-issue. Astonishingly, people who actually understand UK law
have been involved in this, and it is not a legal liability to Wikimedia.
We made that very very very very very clear...
--
- Andrew Gray
andrew.gray(a)dunelm.org.uk