Hi all,
tl;dr This is to let you know, that our "Position Paper on EU Copyright Reform" [1] has now been signed by 31 organisations and will be send out next week.
Signatories We have 31 organisations from 17 European countries that signed it 15 Wikimedia chapters/thematic organisations/user groups 5 Open Knowledge (Foundation) chapters/groups 4 Organisations that primarily work on digital rights 3 Organisations mostly dedicated to free/open knowledge and IP issues 3 Organisations focused on free and open software 1 Open Street Map Foundation national partner
Unfortunately, the Open Street Map Foundation wants to sign it (the paper enjoyed vast support within their community) but for organisational reasons it would take them quite a while do so and we shouldn't wait much longer to send it out. Also, at least two more OKFN chapters stated their support for this, but haven't answered since.
Soft launch We plan on sending this out to people directly involved in the drafting process of the copyright reform proposal and ask for face-to-face meetings. Trying to get general media attention seems like a waste at this point, As the reform proposal is nowhere near publication at this point. I feel it wold be wasted without (political) impact. Nevertheless, if you feel like sharing this, please feel more than free to do so (social media, blogposts).
Brussels Background The new European Commission has its eyes on reforming copyright. The unit responsible for this was moved from the "internal market" directorate (DG MARKT) to the "internet" directorate (DG Connect), sending a rather positive signal. However, there is still considerable struggle within the institutions which way and how far to go. This paper intends to encourage the reform-willing crowd to act.
PDF Version I am also attaching a PDF version of the Meta page that will be used in correspondence. Please let me know if you think something is not okay or it can be improved until early next week.
Thanks a ton to everyone who helped with this (more than 30 active people by my count)!
Cheers, Dimi
[1]https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/EU_policy/Position_Paper_on_EU_Copyright
On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 4:33 AM, Dimitar Parvanov Dimitrov < dimitar.parvanov.dimitrov@gmail.com> wrote:
This is to let you know, that our "Position Paper on EU Copyright Reform" [1] has now been signed by 31 organisations and will be send out next week.
That's terrific, Dimi - congrats! Luis
Dimi, This is nice. Feels like I would like to write a new blog post with this progress. Together with the news I got earlier. I also spoke with the Young Pirates. Well, the problem was not with my speech, but they were more interested about my work with Amelia than about the copyright reform. And also - there is a good chance, that I will work with the Pirates again... but here in Prague. Let's see. All Best Jan ______________________________________________________________
Od: Dimitar Parvanov Dimitrov dimitar.parvanov.dimitrov@gmail.com Komu: Advocacy Advisory Group for WMF LCA Advocacy_Advisors@lists.wikimedia.org Datum: 24.10.2014 13:41 Předmět: [Advocacy Advisors] Position Paper on EU Copyright Reform
Hi all,
tl;dr This is to let you know, that our "Position Paper on EU Copyright Reform" [1] has now been signed by 31 organisations and will be send out next week.
SignatoriesWe have 31 organisations from 17 European countries that signed it15 Wikimedia chapters/thematic organisations/user groups5 Open Knowledge (Foundation) chapters/groups4 Organisations that primarily work on digital rights3 Organisations mostly dedicated to free/open knowledge and IP issues3 Organisations focused on free and open software1 Open Street Map Foundation national partnerUnfortunately, the Open Street Map Foundation wants to sign it (the paper enjoyed vast support within their community) but for organisational reasons it would take them quite a while do so and we shouldn't wait much longer to send it out. Also, at least two more OKFN chapters stated their support for this, but haven't answered since.
Soft launchWe plan on sending this out to people directly involved in the drafting process of the copyright reform proposal and ask for face-to-face meetings. Trying to get general media attention seems like a waste at this point, As the reform proposal is nowhere near publication at this point. I feel it wold be wasted without (political) impact. Nevertheless, if you feel like sharing this, please feel more than free to do so (social media, blogposts).Brussels BackgroundThe new European Commission has its eyes on reforming copyright. The unit responsible for this was moved from the "internal market" directorate (DG MARKT) to the "internet" directorate (DG Connect), sending a rather positive signal. However, there is still considerable struggle within the institutions which way and how far to go. This paper intends to encourage the reform-willing crowd to act. PDF VersionI am also attaching a PDF version of the Meta page that will be used in correspondence. Please let me know if you think something is not okay or it can be improved until early next week.
Thanks a ton to everyone who helped with this (more than 30 active people by my count)!Cheers,Dimi
[1]https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/EU_policy/Position_Paper_on_EU_Copyright https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/EU_policy/Position_Paper_on_EU_Copyright
----------
_______________________________________________ Advocacy_Advisors mailing list Advocacy_Advisors@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors
Hi all,
I will start sending out the position paper shortly. [1] I will follow up with a blogpost (WMF blog - already in the queue). From what I've heard OKFN-DE and OKFN-AT might also write a note on this. If you feel like doing the same, please share your links!
Good news is that over the weekend two Spanish organisations joined. Our local chapter and Access Info Now. The latter is focused on public access to documents and specialises in Freedom of Information Act requests in Europe and Spain. They see copyright being abused as just another tool to block access, which explains their initial interest in our paper. It also carries the argument of censorship to our PDGov argument. They have already published a post on this. [2]
That brings our stats up to 33 organisations, 16 being European WMF affiliates.
Cheers, Dimi
[1]https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/EU_policy/Position_Paper_on_EU_Copyright [2] http://www.access-info.org/index.php/en/european-union/628-reform-copyright-...
2014-10-25 7:53 GMT+02:00 aktron@centrum.cz:
Dimi,
This is nice. Feels like I would like to write a new blog post with this progress. Together with the news I got earlier.
I also spoke with the Young Pirates. Well, the problem was not with my speech, but they were more interested about my work with Amelia than about the copyright reform. And also - there is a good chance, that I will work with the Pirates again... but here in Prague.
Let's see.
All Best
Jan
Od: Dimitar Parvanov Dimitrov dimitar.parvanov.dimitrov@gmail.com Komu: Advocacy Advisory Group for WMF LCA <
Advocacy_Advisors@lists.wikimedia.org>
Datum: 24.10.2014 13:41 Předmět: [Advocacy Advisors] Position Paper on EU Copyright Reform
Hi all,
tl;dr This is to let you know, that our "Position Paper on EU Copyright Reform" [1] has now been signed by 31 organisations and will be send out next week.
Signatories We have 31 organisations from 17 European countries that signed it 15 Wikimedia chapters/thematic organisations/user groups 5 Open Knowledge (Foundation) chapters/groups 4 Organisations that primarily work on digital rights 3 Organisations mostly dedicated to free/open knowledge and IP issues 3 Organisations focused on free and open software 1 Open Street Map Foundation national partner Unfortunately, the Open Street Map Foundation wants to sign it (the paper enjoyed vast support within their community) but for organisational reasons it would take them quite a while do so and we shouldn't wait much longer to send it out. Also, at least two more OKFN chapters stated their support for this, but haven't answered since.
Soft launch We plan on sending this out to people directly involved in the drafting process of the copyright reform proposal and ask for face-to-face meetings. Trying to get general media attention seems like a waste at this point, As the reform proposal is nowhere near publication at this point. I feel it wold be wasted without (political) impact. Nevertheless, if you feel like sharing this, please feel more than free to do so (social media, blogposts). Brussels Background The new European Commission has its eyes on reforming copyright. The unit responsible for this was moved from the "internal market" directorate (DG MARKT) to the "internet" directorate (DG Connect), sending a rather positive signal. However, there is still considerable struggle within the institutions which way and how far to go. This paper intends to encourage the reform-willing crowd to act. PDF Version I am also attaching a PDF version of the Meta page that will be used in correspondence. Please let me know if you think something is not okay or it can be improved until early next week.
Thanks a ton to everyone who helped with this (more than 30 active people by my count)! Cheers, Dimi
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/EU_policy/Position_Paper_on_EU_Copyright
Advocacy_Advisors mailing list Advocacy_Advisors@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors
Advocacy_Advisors mailing list Advocacy_Advisors@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors
Hello Dimi, hello everyone,
Wikimedia UK has just published a blog about this excellent news. You can see it here - https://blog.wikimedia.org.uk/2014/10/free-knowledge-advocacy-group-eu-publi...
Thanks and regards,
Stevie
On 29 October 2014 09:32, Dimitar Parvanov Dimitrov < dimitar.parvanov.dimitrov@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi all,
I will start sending out the position paper shortly. [1] I will follow up with a blogpost (WMF blog - already in the queue). From what I've heard OKFN-DE and OKFN-AT might also write a note on this. If you feel like doing the same, please share your links!
Good news is that over the weekend two Spanish organisations joined. Our local chapter and Access Info Now. The latter is focused on public access to documents and specialises in Freedom of Information Act requests in Europe and Spain. They see copyright being abused as just another tool to block access, which explains their initial interest in our paper. It also carries the argument of censorship to our PDGov argument. They have already published a post on this. [2]
That brings our stats up to 33 organisations, 16 being European WMF affiliates.
Cheers, Dimi
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/EU_policy/Position_Paper_on_EU_Copyright [2] http://www.access-info.org/index.php/en/european-union/628-reform-copyright-...
2014-10-25 7:53 GMT+02:00 aktron@centrum.cz:
Dimi,
This is nice. Feels like I would like to write a new blog post with this progress. Together with the news I got earlier.
I also spoke with the Young Pirates. Well, the problem was not with my speech, but they were more interested about my work with Amelia than about the copyright reform. And also - there is a good chance, that I will work with the Pirates again... but here in Prague.
Let's see.
All Best
Jan
Od: Dimitar Parvanov Dimitrov dimitar.parvanov.dimitrov@gmail.com Komu: Advocacy Advisory Group for WMF LCA <
Advocacy_Advisors@lists.wikimedia.org>
Datum: 24.10.2014 13:41 Předmět: [Advocacy Advisors] Position Paper on EU Copyright Reform
Hi all,
tl;dr This is to let you know, that our "Position Paper on EU Copyright Reform" [1] has now been signed by 31 organisations and will be send out next week.
Signatories We have 31 organisations from 17 European countries that signed it 15 Wikimedia chapters/thematic organisations/user groups 5 Open Knowledge (Foundation) chapters/groups 4 Organisations that primarily work on digital rights 3 Organisations mostly dedicated to free/open knowledge and IP issues 3 Organisations focused on free and open software 1 Open Street Map Foundation national partner Unfortunately, the Open Street Map Foundation wants to sign it (the paper enjoyed vast support within their community) but for organisational reasons it would take them quite a while do so and we shouldn't wait much longer to send it out. Also, at least two more OKFN chapters stated their support for this, but haven't answered since.
Soft launch We plan on sending this out to people directly involved in the drafting process of the copyright reform proposal and ask for face-to-face meetings. Trying to get general media attention seems like a waste at this point, As the reform proposal is nowhere near publication at this point. I feel it wold be wasted without (political) impact. Nevertheless, if you feel like sharing this, please feel more than free to do so (social media, blogposts). Brussels Background The new European Commission has its eyes on reforming copyright. The unit responsible for this was moved from the "internal market" directorate (DG MARKT) to the "internet" directorate (DG Connect), sending a rather positive signal. However, there is still considerable struggle within the institutions which way and how far to go. This paper intends to encourage the reform-willing crowd to act. PDF Version I am also attaching a PDF version of the Meta page that will be used in correspondence. Please let me know if you think something is not okay or it can be improved until early next week.
Thanks a ton to everyone who helped with this (more than 30 active people by my count)! Cheers, Dimi
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/EU_policy/Position_Paper_on_EU_Copyright
Advocacy_Advisors mailing list Advocacy_Advisors@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors
Advocacy_Advisors mailing list Advocacy_Advisors@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors
Advocacy_Advisors mailing list Advocacy_Advisors@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors
Also - I wonder if we should set up some FKAGEU accounts on social media, especially Twitter...
On 30 October 2014 12:06, Stevie Benton stevie.benton@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:
Hello Dimi, hello everyone,
Wikimedia UK has just published a blog about this excellent news. You can see it here - https://blog.wikimedia.org.uk/2014/10/free-knowledge-advocacy-group-eu-publi...
Thanks and regards,
Stevie
On 29 October 2014 09:32, Dimitar Parvanov Dimitrov < dimitar.parvanov.dimitrov@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi all,
I will start sending out the position paper shortly. [1] I will follow up with a blogpost (WMF blog - already in the queue). From what I've heard OKFN-DE and OKFN-AT might also write a note on this. If you feel like doing the same, please share your links!
Good news is that over the weekend two Spanish organisations joined. Our local chapter and Access Info Now. The latter is focused on public access to documents and specialises in Freedom of Information Act requests in Europe and Spain. They see copyright being abused as just another tool to block access, which explains their initial interest in our paper. It also carries the argument of censorship to our PDGov argument. They have already published a post on this. [2]
That brings our stats up to 33 organisations, 16 being European WMF affiliates.
Cheers, Dimi
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/EU_policy/Position_Paper_on_EU_Copyright [2] http://www.access-info.org/index.php/en/european-union/628-reform-copyright-...
2014-10-25 7:53 GMT+02:00 aktron@centrum.cz:
Dimi,
This is nice. Feels like I would like to write a new blog post with this progress. Together with the news I got earlier.
I also spoke with the Young Pirates. Well, the problem was not with my speech, but they were more interested about my work with Amelia than about the copyright reform. And also - there is a good chance, that I will work with the Pirates again... but here in Prague.
Let's see.
All Best
Jan
Od: Dimitar Parvanov Dimitrov dimitar.parvanov.dimitrov@gmail.com Komu: Advocacy Advisory Group for WMF LCA <
Advocacy_Advisors@lists.wikimedia.org>
Datum: 24.10.2014 13:41 Předmět: [Advocacy Advisors] Position Paper on EU Copyright Reform
Hi all,
tl;dr This is to let you know, that our "Position Paper on EU Copyright Reform" [1] has now been signed by 31 organisations and will be send out next week.
Signatories We have 31 organisations from 17 European countries that signed it 15 Wikimedia chapters/thematic organisations/user groups 5 Open Knowledge (Foundation) chapters/groups 4 Organisations that primarily work on digital rights 3 Organisations mostly dedicated to free/open knowledge and IP issues 3 Organisations focused on free and open software 1 Open Street Map Foundation national partner Unfortunately, the Open Street Map Foundation wants to sign it (the paper enjoyed vast support within their community) but for organisational reasons it would take them quite a while do so and we shouldn't wait much longer to send it out. Also, at least two more OKFN chapters stated their support for this, but haven't answered since.
Soft launch We plan on sending this out to people directly involved in the drafting process of the copyright reform proposal and ask for face-to-face meetings. Trying to get general media attention seems like a waste at this point, As the reform proposal is nowhere near publication at this point. I feel it wold be wasted without (political) impact. Nevertheless, if you feel like sharing this, please feel more than free to do so (social media, blogposts). Brussels Background The new European Commission has its eyes on reforming copyright. The unit responsible for this was moved from the "internal market" directorate (DG MARKT) to the "internet" directorate (DG Connect), sending a rather positive signal. However, there is still considerable struggle within the institutions which way and how far to go. This paper intends to encourage the reform-willing crowd to act. PDF Version I am also attaching a PDF version of the Meta page that will be used in correspondence. Please let me know if you think something is not okay or it can be improved until early next week.
Thanks a ton to everyone who helped with this (more than 30 active people by my count)! Cheers, Dimi
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/EU_policy/Position_Paper_on_EU_Copyright
Advocacy_Advisors mailing list Advocacy_Advisors@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors
Advocacy_Advisors mailing list Advocacy_Advisors@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors
Advocacy_Advisors mailing list Advocacy_Advisors@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors
--
Stevie Benton Head of External Relations Wikimedia UK+44 (0) 20 7065 0993 / +44 (0) 7803 505 173 @StevieBenton
Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects).
*Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.*
Hi all
The UK government yesterday announced new rules on access to orphan works. You can see details here:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-opens-access-to-91-million-orphan-work...
Although the headline is “UK opens access to 91 million orphan works”, the reality is a little more prosaic. The new rules allow the UK Intellectual Property Office to grant users a licence to use an orphan work on payment of a fee and on the provision of evidence that a ‘diligent search’ has been undertaken to find the copyright owner.
The rule allowing re-use after diligent search has been part of copyright law in the UK for many years. The primary purpose of the new licences seems to be to provide greater certainty to re-users that the searches they have undertaken are sufficiently extensive to guarantee legal protection should the copyright owner come forward.
Searches have to be exceptionally comprehensive before the Intellectual Property Office will certify them as ‘diligent’:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/orphan-works-diligent-search-guid...
This may help a few GLAMs who have high-profile orphan images in their collections that they would like to use on their websites, but a real solution to the orphan works problem must await a more radical approach that goes beyond both this and the existing EU Orphan Works Directive.
Michael
The situation in the US is even worse. There is no orphan works legislation in the U.S. whatsoever, so if you can't locate the author, you can't use the work (without significant financial risk). What's even worse is that the U.S. is one of the few countries in the world that doesn't recognize the rule of the shorter term (despite it being recommended by the Berne Convention), so a large number of works are orphan works in the U.S. but public domain elsewhere.
Because there is no orphan works legislation in the U.S., there is some potential for reform here. I just hope that we can steer that reform into getting the U.S. to adopt the rule of the shorter term (which will actually help the Wikimedia projects), rather than just a band-aid tailored specifically for GLAM institutions (as many European countries have adopted).
Ryan Kaldari
Is the Foundation prepared to take a stand on political candidates with platforms and records indicating that they support such reforms? Or are we just hoping that whoever gets elected will listen to us instead of their contributors?
On Thursday, October 30, 2014, Ryan Kaldari rkaldari@wikimedia.org wrote:
The situation in the US is even worse. There is no orphan works legislation in the U.S. whatsoever, so if you can't locate the author, you can't use the work (without significant financial risk). What's even worse is that the U.S. is one of the few countries in the world that doesn't recognize the rule of the shorter term (despite it being recommended by the Berne Convention), so a large number of works are orphan works in the U.S. but public domain elsewhere.
Because there is no orphan works legislation in the U.S., there is some potential for reform here. I just hope that we can steer that reform into getting the U.S. to adopt the rule of the shorter term (which will actually help the Wikimedia projects), rather than just a band-aid tailored specifically for GLAM institutions (as many European countries have adopted).
Ryan Kaldari
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 5:07 AM, Stevie Benton < stevie.benton@wikimedia.org.uk> wrote:
Also - I wonder if we should set up some FKAGEU accounts on social media, especially Twitter...
Only after getting a less awkward name ;)
Luis
Weasel? Am 30.10.2014 13:59 schrieb "Luis Villa" lvilla@wikimedia.org:
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 5:07 AM, Stevie Benton < stevie.benton@wikimedia.org.uk> wrote:
Also - I wonder if we should set up some FKAGEU accounts on social media, especially Twitter...
Only after getting a less awkward name ;)
Luis
-- Luis Villa Deputy General Counsel Wikimedia Foundation 415.839.6885 ext. 6810
*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, 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 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Legal_Disclaimer.*
Advocacy_Advisors mailing list Advocacy_Advisors@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors
Thank you, Stevie!
As it so happens, I was in a room with several people from the Commission as I sent it, so I had the chance to ping them on it immediately. We might get a special meeting between the Commission and only civil society members on this topic, as they agreed we don't have the same lobbying resources and need some special attention. I plan also on inviting key people to the founding event of WMBE.
As fo the name, yes we need a better one. FKAGEU was supposed to be a self-explanatory, internal working title. In this community names just stick, I guess.
Cheers, Dimi
2014-10-30 15:03 GMT+01:00 Jan Engelmann jan.engelmann@wikimedia.de:
Weasel? Am 30.10.2014 13:59 schrieb "Luis Villa" lvilla@wikimedia.org:
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 5:07 AM, Stevie Benton < stevie.benton@wikimedia.org.uk> wrote:
Also - I wonder if we should set up some FKAGEU accounts on social media, especially Twitter...
Only after getting a less awkward name ;)
Luis
-- Luis Villa Deputy General Counsel Wikimedia Foundation 415.839.6885 ext. 6810
*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, 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 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Legal_Disclaimer.*
Advocacy_Advisors mailing list Advocacy_Advisors@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors
Advocacy_Advisors mailing list Advocacy_Advisors@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors
Hi all,
I think @weasel would be nice Twitter name, or maybe something like @eurowiki or @wiki_eu?
Best Jan
Am 30.10.2014 um 15:49 schrieb Dimitar Parvanov Dimitrov:
Thank you, Stevie!
As it so happens, I was in a room with several people from the Commission as I sent it, so I had the chance to ping them on it immediately. We might get a special meeting between the Commission and only civil society members on this topic, as they agreed we don't have the same lobbying resources and need some special attention. I plan also on inviting key people to the founding event of WMBE.
As fo the name, yes we need a better one. FKAGEU was supposed to be a self-explanatory, internal working title. In this community names just stick, I guess.
Cheers, Dimi
2014-10-30 15:03 GMT+01:00 Jan Engelmann <jan.engelmann@wikimedia.de mailto:jan.engelmann@wikimedia.de>:
Weasel? Am 30.10.2014 13:59 schrieb "Luis Villa" <lvilla@wikimedia.org <mailto:lvilla@wikimedia.org>>: On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 5:07 AM, Stevie Benton <stevie.benton@wikimedia.org.uk <mailto:stevie.benton@wikimedia.org.uk>> wrote: Also - I wonder if we should set up some FKAGEU accounts on social media, especially Twitter... Only after getting a less awkward name ;) Luis -- Luis Villa Deputy General Counsel Wikimedia Foundation 415.839.6885 ext. 6810 <tel:415.839.6885%20ext.%206810> /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, 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 <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Legal_Disclaimer>./ _______________________________________________ Advocacy_Advisors mailing list Advocacy_Advisors@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Advocacy_Advisors@lists.wikimedia.org> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors _______________________________________________ Advocacy_Advisors mailing list Advocacy_Advisors@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Advocacy_Advisors@lists.wikimedia.org> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors
Advocacy_Advisors mailing list Advocacy_Advisors@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors
publicpolicy@lists.wikimedia.org