Hi All,

As mentioned in the blog post, the ACLU is representing us pro bono. We have also been putting in staff time as needed. We paid Cooley at the beginning of the case to help us support the ACLU. Those costs (in FY14-15) were within our allocated FY14-15 legal budget. In June, Cooley generously offered to continue representing us pro bono going forward. Therefore, in FY15-16, we are not incurring outside counsel costs because both ACLU and Cooley are working pro bono for us.

Hope that clears things up.

-Michelle

Michelle Paulson
Legal Director
Wikimedia Foundation
149 New Montgomery Street, 6th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105
mpaulson@wikimedia.org
415.839.6885 ext. 6608 (Office)

415.882.0495 (Fax)

NOTICE: This message may be confidential or legally privileged. If you have received it by accident, please delete it and let us know about the mistake. As an attorney for the Wikimedia Foundation and for legal/ethical reasons, I cannot give legal advice to, or serve as a lawyer for, community members, volunteers, or staff members in their personal capacity. For more on what this means, please see our legal disclaimer.

On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 11:13 AM, Fæ <faewik@gmail.com> wrote:

On 25 October 2015 at 16:30, John Andersson <john.andersson@wikimedia.se> wrote:
> In the blog post that Michelle posted it says that both ACLU and Cooley, LLP
> are working pro bono. (Which is pretty sweet!) Does that answer your
> question?

The question was "Are the WMF costs for pursuing the case published?"

That it was mentioned that some external lawyers working pro bono is
nice to know, but is unrelated to the publication of WMF costs.

Thanks,
Fae
--
faewik@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

_______________________________________________
Publicpolicy mailing list
Publicpolicy@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/publicpolicy