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@gmail.com wrote:
On 27/09/2007, Armed Blowfish diodontida.armata@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.
In any case: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK
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@dunelm.org.uk