Hi everyone.
Some might remember the 2019 recast of the EU PSI Directive (which is now
also called Open Data Directive) which has a nice round number EU/2019/1024
(https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2019/1024/oj). As a directive, it has
been transposed in EU member states and is also transposed/about to be
transposed into the EFTA states.
I was involved in the 2019 recast as a member of the staff of MEP Felix
Reda who wrote the opinion in the IMCO committee of the European Parliament
(the leading committee was ITRE:
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-8-2018-0438_EN.html#_sectio…
)
The Directive has both a general principle on the reuse of content but also
paragraph about how to process requests for re-use.
Germany transposed the PSI-OD-Directive into the "Datennutzungsgesetz" in
2021 but left out the processing part for requests for re-use. I spoke to a
civil servant in the responsible ministry who was involved in the drafting
process and she stated that this was by design. Since the "general
principle" on re-use applies, there would be no use for requests any more.
This idea has been rejected by academic literature which still claims that
the possibility for requests remain embedded in the law
Long story short: After reading the literature, the directive and the law,
I believe that Germany has introduced a law that would allow liberating
content for re-use under license terms compatible with Wikimedia projects.
For a few weeks now, I have put this theory to the test and I have applied
for usage rights for various government documents, pictures etc. This has
been largely successful, but not without hickups. People in the
administration are usually confused by these requests and it takes them a
while to process them.
I would be interested to learn if anyone else in any other EU/EFTA state
has ever used the PSI-OD-Directive (and the transposed law) to force
government entities to release content under a free license.
This was the most concise way of describing this for me. I left out many
details in order to not turn this into a long paper. I am happy to
elaborate on details if requested.
Mathias
(there are some exceptions in the directive. GLAM institutions are not
fully within the scope of all parts of the directive and it is not as
simple to simply go to a museum or a library and tell them to give you a
license for stuff they own. Public broadcasting it also out of scope)
Hi all!
I'm Jeremy from WMF, I'm supporting Ziski's work with this great group.
It's time to kickstart collaborations among the advocacy network for this
year. Save the date and join us for the kickoff call that Cataline from WM
Chile has been alluding to!
The ⚡ *2025 Advocacy Network Launch Call *⚡ will take place virtually on
Zoom. This call is an opportunity to select priorities that the group wants
to work on for this year, and to form working groups that will be
responsible for each of those topics. It is a great opportunity for members
of our movement to connect, brainstorm, and hone our outreach, advocacy,
and policy efforts in 2025 and beyond.
*Key info:*
🗓️ Call Time: February 19 @ 12:00 - 13:30 UTC (check your local time
<https://zonestamp.toolforge.org/1739966400>)
📍Zoom Link:
https://wikimedia.zoom.us/j/84828522106?pwd=XUsakITXwMPjvxxZg4OQHm84L8FMvl.1
🔑 Passcode: 385358
In case of any questions, don’t hesitate to reach out to me (
jbernick-ctr(a)wikimedia.org) or Ziski (fputz(a)wikimedia.org)!
We can't wait to see you there! 😀
Jeremy Bernick (they/them)
Legal Fellow
Wikimedia Foundation
1 Montgomery Street, Suite 1600
San Francisco, CA 94104
jbernick-ctr(a)wikimedia.org
NOTICE: This message might have confidential or legally privileged
information in it. If you have received this message by accident, please
delete it and let us know about the mistake. For legal reasons, I may only
serve as a legal fellow for the Wikimedia Foundation. This means I may not
give legal advice to or serve as a lawyer for community members,
volunteers, or staff members in their personal capacity.
Hello everybody,
I could not help but fall into a series of rabbit holes over the past
weeks. The question this time: Are trained models (of the connectionist
AI flavour) actually protected by IP legislation? And if so: Why?
I stumbled across this through a semirelated question that made me
realize: I had read a lot about TDM exceptions and whether they apply
for training connectionist models. And on the output side of things,
there is ongoing discussion on whether the outputs of generative systems
deserve IP protection.
However, what I had to dig into and found just a bit of discussion, was
the question of IP protection of the trained models themselves. Or, in
other terms, if providers slap some license on a model they trained: On
what basis can they even constrain the way in which they can be re-used?
I am certainly not the first person to stumble over this, so I will be
very glad about any pointers towards articles on the topic.
What I found so far was a paper by the IPO from 2020 that laments the
supposed lack of sui generis protection for trained models:
<https://ipo.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/SG-model-rights-committee-paper-…>.
In Section III A they argue that trained models as machine-created works
might not be subject to (US) copyright law, at least if no human
creative input or at least interaction is involved.
It could be argued that RLHF would constitute a human involvement
(albeit mostly outsourced to clickworkers in the global south) –
provided the feedback fulfills the minimum threshold of creativity and
is not merely a human in the loop that acts on predetermined rules that
leave no leeway for individual expression.
However, even this argument would fall flat whenever reinforcement
learning is based on synthetic input, e.g. a model being trained through
RL by another trained model.
After looking at patents and trade secrets, the IPO looks longingly at
existing sui generis rights, namely the European SGDR and asks for
similar SGR for trained connectionist AI models.
Nuno Sousa e Silva argues in
<https://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2024/01/18/are-ai-models-weights-prot…>
(after stumbling over the very same question I had) that SGDR could be
applied out-of-the-box at least to the weights of a connectionist model,
checking pretty much all of the boxes.
So, generally:
a) yay, another case for the consequences of SGDR
b) did I miss stuff? Had you come across arguments that trained models
check some other category for IP protection?
bb) If not: what even is the legal basis for any license at least
outside the EU?
Any thoughts are highly appreciated!
regards,
-stk
--
Stefan Kaufmann (er)
Referent Politik und öffentlicher Sektor
Wikimedia Deutschland e. V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23–24 | 10963 Berlin |
Tel. +49 (0)30-577 11 62-0 | <https://wikimedia.de>
Bleiben Sie auf dem neuesten Stand! Aktuelle Nachrichten und spannende
Geschichten rund um Wikimedia, Wikipedia und Freies Wissen im
Newsletter: <https://www.wikimedia.de/newsletter/>
Unsere Vision ist eine Welt, in der alle Menschen am Wissen der
Menschheit teilhaben, es nutzen und mehren können. Helfen Sie uns dabei!
https://spenden.wikimedia.de
Wikimedia Deutschland — Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V.
Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Charlottenburg, VR
23855. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für Körperschaften
I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/029/42207. Geschäftsführende Vorstände:
Franziska Heine, Dr. Christian Humborg.
Hello everyone,
As Wikimedia Deutschland, we have been part of the *"Bündnis F5" - F5
Alliance for digital policy for the common good <https://buendnis-f5.de/>*
since 2021. We founded this digital policy alliance with AlgorithmWatch,
Society for civic rights, Open Knolwedge Foundation Deutschland and
Reporters Without Borders to jointly develop more political weight for our
shared objectives. The core of our work is a structured dialog with
policymakers on digital policy issues, such as framework conditions for
free access to information, privacy, open data, transparency and hate
speech online.
As alliance F5, we have compiled political positions on the EU elections.
They show what measures and laws we believe are needed to realize the
vision of an open, free, reliable, sustainable and secure internet. The
positions were sent to EU candidates and selected officials, such as
European and international digital policy officers, as well as advertised
on social media and form the basis for related discussions.
*You can find them on Wikimedia Commons here:*
Political positions on the EU elections (English)
<https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Positions_of_the_F5_alliance_on_the…>
Political positions on the EU elections (German)
<https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Positionen_des_B%C3%BCndnis_F5_zur_…>
...and as pdf attached.
*The central points of our demands paper are:*
- Platforms: Regulate and restructure
- Artificial intelligence: Fair and sustainable
- Open source software & open hardware: Foundation of the future
- Strengthen privacy, protect journalists
- Digital Knowledge Act: A new era of free knowledge
Wikimedia has focused on the 5th point of the Digital Knowledge Act, in
line with the demands of Wikimedia Europe. Please do not hesitate to
contact us if you have any questions on this.
A recommendation in this context: Last week, re:publica
<https://re-publica.com/de>, Europe's largest conference on digital rights,
took place in Berlin. We were lucky enough to have Rebecca MacKinnon there
to discuss the Global Digital Compact on a high-level panel:
- Renata Dwan (Special Adviser Office of the UN Secretary-General's
Envoy on Technology), Rebecca MacKinnon (Vice President, Global
Advocacy, Wikimedia Foundation), Jens Matthias Lorentz (Head of Digital
Politics and AI in Foreign Policy Group, Ministry of Foreign Affairs),
Jeanette Hofmann (Director at the Alexander von Humboldt Institute for
Internet and Society and Professor of Internet Policy):
*Who cares about international digital policy? What do we expect from
the UN Global Digital Compact 2024
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxMmt4XCYro> (English)*
best regards
Lilli & team politics and public sector at WMDE
--
Lilli Iliev *(sie)*
Leitung Politik und öffentlicher Sektor
head of public policy and public sector
@lilliiliev@eupolicy.social
-----------------------------
Bleiben Sie auf dem neuesten Stand! Aktuelle Nachrichten und spannende
Geschichten rund um Wikimedia, Wikipedia und Freies Wissen im Newsletter: Zur
Anmeldung <https://www.wikimedia.de/newsletter/>.
------------------------------
Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
http://wikimedia.de Stellen Sie sich eine Welt vor, in der jeder Mensch an
der Menge allen Wissens frei teilhaben kann.
Helfen Sie uns dabei! http://spenden.wikimedia.de/
Wikimedia Deutschland — Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V.
Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Charlottenburg, VR 23855 B.
Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin,
Steuernummer 27/029/42207. Geschäftsführende Vorstände: Franziska
Heine, Dr. Christian Humborg.
Hello!
The second von der Leyen Commission seems to be performing a u-turn
compared to its first iteration. The past legislative term was all about
grand, overarching regulation in digital and climate policies. This time
around it might all be about fewer new rules and simplifying the existing
ones.
Dimi & Michele
=== Say Goodbye: AI Liability Directive & E-Privacy Directive ===
The European Commission published its annual work plan
<https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/7617998c-86e6-4a74-b33c-249e…>.
As the main narrative of the EU is currently “simplification” of the many,
many layers of rules, the first and easy step was to shoot down two
legislative files that were dead in the water anyway. The AI Liability
Directive
<https://iapp.org/news/a/european-commission-withdraws-ai-liability-directiv…>
and e-Privacy Regulation
<https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/eprivacy-regulation>
proposals were withdrawn. While no one expected the former to even have a
chance, the decision to axe the latter faced criticism from Axel Voss, a
leading centre-right lawmaker, who warned it would lead to legal
uncertainty and imbalances in corporate power.
—
The AI liability framework, especially, had been viewed as a key element in
addressing AI-related harm and corporate accountability, but would have
complicated the rulebook, already packed with the AI Act and the various
liability directives. E-Privacy was meant to lay down specific rules on
tracking and monitoring online.
—
Why it matters for Wikimedia: The withdrawal has no direct effect on
Wikimedia, but it will likely spare the legal and advocacy teams some
resources in the coming years. On the flip side, the E-Evidence proposal
would have simplified the use of cookies for first party audience
measurement and security (e.g. A/B testing, temporary accounts). It is now
important to figure out if this proposal will be replaced by another
instrument
<https://www.statewatch.org/news/2024/june/policing-by-design-the-latest-eu-…>,
of course.
=== Hold Your Breath: Simplification Packages ===
The European Commission is working on three regulatory simplification
packages
<https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/8556fc33-48a3-4a96-94e8-8eca…>.
These aim to reduce administrative burdens, including minimizing reporting
requirements for companies with fewer than 500 employees. There's also an
ongoing idea to tackle "gold plating" of EU laws — the practice of national
legislators spalling on additional obligations on top of EU rules.
—
The first simplification package (Omnibus I & Omnibus II) was published
<https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_25_614> this
week. It focuses on sustainability reporting and carbon border rules.
—
A further package with a focus on the digital sphere is in the works. It
will center on cybersecurity rules, but much of its content is yet to be
decided.
—
Why it matters for Wikimedia: On one hand these changes might lower the
compliance burden for Wikimedia organisations (e.g. fewer expenses on
advocacy, legal, tech development and external consultants). At the same
time they might undermine some rights protection and enforcement
mechanisms. Details and nuances will matter.
=== Geo-blocking ===
The European Commission launched a call for evidence
<https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/1…>
to gather stakeholders’ input in view of the evaluation of the Geo-blocking
Regulation. This piece of legislation has been adopted in 2018 and aims at
outlawing the practice of unjustified geo-blocking that discriminates
against customers on the basis of their nationality, place of residence or
establishment. Despite this goal, audiovisual services and
copyright-protected content are excluded from the scope of the regulation.
—
WMEU is going to share its point of view with the Commission in order to
achieve a true digital single market, by overcoming the current artificial
partition of the internal market along national borders, also for
audiovisual and copyrighted content.
—
Why it matters for Wikimedia: Wikimedia projects thrive on cross-border
access, and changes to Geo-blocking could either expand or restrict users'
ability to access content freely across borders. One example would be to
access cited sources across borders (e.g. a documentary aired by a
country’s public broadcaster).
=== Child Protection ===
Child protection and age-verification are a hot topic, as regular readers
of this report will know. There have a been a few developments in the
sphere this month:
1.
A tender
<https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/funding/call-tenders-development-c…>
for
developing age-verification solutions was won by Scytáles AB and
Deutsche Telekom’s T-Systems International GmbH, the developers of the
Corona Warn App in Germany.
2.
The European Data Protection Board has issued a statement on
age-assurance
<https://www.edpb.europa.eu/our-work-tools/our-documents/other-guidance/stat…>
laying out recommendations and principles.
3.
The European Parliament’s Intergroup on Children’s Rights
<https://www.europarl.europa.eu/meps/en/intergroup/details/7886/Intergroup%2…>
has been constituted. Intergroups are unofficial groupings of MEPs who are
interested in a particular topic that does not necessarily fall within the
scope of standing committees.
—
Why it matters for Wikimedia: Regulations on age-verification could affect
how Wikimedia projects are accessed. At the same time, child protection
measures are a broad array of rules and actions, and Wikimedia
organisations and communities are engaged in many ways.
=== Disinformation ===
The European Democracy Shield is a non-legislative initiative that seeks to
enhance digital and media literacy, establish a European network of
fact-checkers in all EU languages, and strengthen digital enforcement
through legislation like the Digital Services Act and AI Act. A special
committee
<https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/B-10-2024-0216_EN.html> with
that name was constituted on 3 February 2025, chaired by Nathalie Loiseau
(RE, France), to oversee the initiative.
—
Why it matters for Wikimedia: We do care about reliable information and
literacy. However it is currently hard to see how this initiative would
have any real-life effects.
===END===
--
Wikimedia Europe ivzw
Hi Ziski and Patricia
Sadly I've only just seen the message about this meeting! My bad entirely.
Sending my belated apologies - would be great to be on future calls, I need
to get better at checking the public policy emails ;)
Best
Lucy
On Wed, 19 Feb 2025 at 12:01, <publicpolicy-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
wrote:
> Send Publicpolicy mailing list submissions to
> publicpolicy(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe, please visit
>
> https://eu-west-1.protection.sophos.com?d=wikimedia.org&u=aHR0cHM6Ly9saXN0c…
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> publicpolicy-owner(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Publicpolicy digest..."
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Reminder call on Feb 19 | 2025 Advocacy Network Launch Call!
> (Franziska Putz)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2025 20:59:04 +0000
> From: Franziska Putz <fputz(a)wikimedia.org>
> Subject: [Publicpolicy] Reminder call on Feb 19 | 2025 Advocacy
> Network Launch Call!
> To: Publicpolicy Group for Wikimedia
> <publicpolicy(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID:
> <
> CAB+K4kcAe_mJtx4Q9xH7sK0FZ7tJ6wLkUeu+v9bpJD5T8Oz3zw(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
> boundary="000000000000b4b568062e70db55"
>
> Dear all,
>
> This is a reminder that tomorrow, February 19, the ⚡ *2025 Advocacy Network
> Launch Call *⚡ will take place virtually on Zoom. We will be discussing
> priorities to collaborate on in the coming year, and form working groups
> around these.
>
>
> - 🗓️ Call Time: February 19 @ 12:00 - 13:30 UTC (check your local time
> <
> https://eu-west-1.protection.sophos.com?d=toolforge.org&u=aHR0cHM6Ly96b25lc…
> >)
> - Notes/Agenda:
>
> https://eu-west-1.protection.sophos.com?d=wikimedia.org&u=aHR0cHM6Ly9ldGhlc…
> <
> https://eu-west-1.protection.sophos.com?d=wikimedia.org&u=aHR0cHM6Ly9ldGhlc…
> >
> - 📍Zoom Link:
>
> https://eu-west-1.protection.sophos.com?d=zoom.us&u=aHR0cHM6Ly93aWtpbWVkaWE…
>
> - 🔑 Passcode: 385358
>
> Looking forward to seeing you there,
>
> Ziski
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 6, 2025 at 10:47 AM Jeremy Bernick <jbernick-ctr(a)wikimedia.org
> >
> wrote:
>
> > Hi all!
> >
> > I'm Jeremy from WMF, I'm supporting Ziski's work with this great group.
> >
> > It's time to kickstart collaborations among the advocacy network for this
> > year. Save the date and join us for the kickoff call that Cataline from
> WM
> > Chile has been alluding to!
> >
> > The ⚡ *2025 Advocacy Network Launch Call *⚡ will take place virtually on
> > Zoom. This call is an opportunity to select priorities that the group
> wants
> > to work on for this year, and to form working groups that will be
> > responsible for each of those topics. It is a great opportunity for
> members
> > of our movement to connect, brainstorm, and hone our outreach, advocacy,
> > and policy efforts in 2025 and beyond.
> >
> > *Key info:*
> >
> > 🗓️ Call Time: February 19 @ 12:00 - 13:30 UTC (check your local time
> > <
> https://eu-west-1.protection.sophos.com?d=toolforge.org&u=aHR0cHM6Ly96b25lc…
> >)
> >
> > 📍Zoom Link:
> >
> https://eu-west-1.protection.sophos.com?d=zoom.us&u=aHR0cHM6Ly93aWtpbWVkaWE…
> >
> >
> > 🔑 Passcode: 385358
> >
> > In case of any questions, don’t hesitate to reach out to me (
> > jbernick-ctr(a)wikimedia.org) or Ziski (fputz(a)wikimedia.org)!
> >
> > We can't wait to see you there! 😀
> >
> > Jeremy Bernick (they/them)
> >
> > Legal Fellow
> >
> > Wikimedia Foundation
> >
> > 1 Montgomery Street, Suite 1600
> >
> > San Francisco, CA 94104
> >
> > jbernick-ctr(a)wikimedia.org
> >
> >
> > NOTICE: This message might have confidential or legally privileged
> > information in it. If you have received this message by accident, please
> > delete it and let us know about the mistake. For legal reasons, I may
> only
> > serve as a legal fellow for the Wikimedia Foundation. This means I may
> not
> > give legal advice to or serve as a lawyer for community members,
> > volunteers, or staff members in their personal capacity.
> > _______________________________________________
> > Publicpolicy mailing list -- publicpolicy(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > To unsubscribe send an email to publicpolicy-leave(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> >
>
Hi everyone,
I hope you're getting ready for a nice weekend, wherever in the world you are!
I'm pleased to share a piece of news that will hopefully provide a positive ending to your week: Wikipedia has officially been recognized as a Digital Public Good. You can read the full details in this blog post [1].
What: Wikipedia has entered the official registry of digital public goods that is hosted by the Digital Public Goods Alliance (DPGA), a multistakeholder initiative that is endorsed by the United Nations (UN) Secretary-General in support of open source technologies that contribute to the advancement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
So what: This status is a very public stamp of approval of the value we've been telling everyone for 20+ years our projects provide. Wikipedia plays a unique role in advancing global access to a free and open source of trusted knowledge, in the public interest, while upholding values of transparency and personal privacy, and following open source protocols...and we're not the only ones claiming this. The designation underpins impactful talking points anytime we're mentioning how our projects contribute to important topics like media literacy, linguistic diversity online, or the development of generative AI tools.
Join us in sharing this good news with your networks!
Happy Thursday,
Ziski
---
[1] https://diff.wikimedia.org/2025/02/12/wikipedia-recognized-as-a-digital-pub…
Hi all,
Wikimedia Europe, the University of Amsterdam and the Eurecat Research
Centre are currently researching
<https://wikimedia.brussels/wikimedia-europe-partners-for-research-into-wiki…>
election information and election period content moderation on Wikipedia.
It is a project funded by the European Media and Information Fund
<https://gulbenkian.pt/emifund/> and focuses on the 2024 European
Parliament elections.
As part of this project we are gathering and recording Wikipedia editors'
experiences.
Tomorrow we are inviting you to* share your stories, tricks, solutions and
experience with trolls, bots, misinformed editors. *Where do you see them
most often? How do you deal with them? How can others learn from your
experience?
Join *Troll-spotting: stories across Europe
<https://tel.meet/wag-moez-kpd?pin=9238161380557>* (online)
*4 February (Tuesday), 18:00-19:30 CET*
Cheers,
D
--
Wikimedia Europe ivzw
Dear friends,
The events from the USA in the last week have made it very clear that this
new US Presidential Administration will not be friendly towards our
projects or movement.
*Resource for media NGOs:* The foreign aid freeze (in addition to the grant
pause for any initiatives related to DEI
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_United_States_federal_government_grant_p…>)
is affecting all sorts of media freedom projects and direct support of
journalism around the world. Reporters Without Borders
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reporters_Without_Borders> (RSF) is trying
to figure out the cumulative effect as well as highlight the stories of
organizations and journalists who have been impacted. They are hearing from
groups all over the place--Ukraine, Lebanon, Venezuela, exiled Russians and
Afghans. They want to shine a light on this for both the public and
policymakers. 👉 If you are are hearing from media or media-adjacent NGOs
(or you are one of these) who have been impacted--please contact RSF:
Clayton Weimers
Executive Director, RSF USA
(202) 813-9497, ext. 1
cweimers(a)rsf.org
*What we are doing: *The Wikimedia Foundation and US-based allies are
diligently sharing information, monitoring developments, and adjusting
strategy. We will continually provide updates about the situation and
information about resources and support. Most of the time it will be
appropriate to share this information with smaller groups rather than via
larger emails like this mailing list. Here are some additional updates:
- *💰 Funding.* Round 2 of the General Support Fund kicks off this
month; you can ask for *funds to cover public policy advocacy*. Review this
guide
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Programs/Wikimedia_Community_Fund/Re…>
to learn more and you can contact Ziski (fputz(a)wikimedia.org) for help
with your application.
- *💡 Resources. *We will add resources to our Meta-Wiki page
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation/Legal/Global_Advocacy/…>
that include guides from allies on how to contact your representatives,
develop media strategy, navigate Capitol Hill for US audiences, and WMF
will develop talking points on our core policy priorities.
- *🫂 Network. *There will be a call later this month (details coming
this week) to re-strengthen the Wikimedia advocacy network and continue to
collaborate closely within the movement.
Wishing you all a good start to your week,
Ziski