On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 11:53 AM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/dec/09/wikipedia-censorship-iwf-re...
This is apparently the *first* IWF decision *ever* to require review.
No shock: Their blocking is conducted in secret.
While I can accept most of the blocking is probably russian kiddy-porn hosts, I do not see any reason why we should assume that we are the first questionable block.
It's just that with the fake error messages they managed to mostly keep people from finding out about them. You can't demand review if you don't know you're being blocked. The few that know realize the IWF is right in these cases, or simply don't give a darn about a UK audience.
My prediction: they've been turned to mincemeat every media interview they've done on the subject, we've looked like stars. Everyone
[snip]
Even the expected Wikipedia haters have had had articles along the lines of "this case is stupid, but Wikipedia is bad anyways". The press is as good as we could have hoped for, I think.
It is possible the IWF will try to make the decision stand. In which case, party on.
I doubt it. It wouldn't be good for their mission: Most things they block will probably never fight back even if they knew of the block, and most won't ever know. Unblocking us presents little danger in setting a precedent against the IWF's interests, unless there are immediate plans for the IWF become much more expansive in what they block. As it stands this battle endangers their core mission. They would be wise to back off.