http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/wikipedia/6710237/Wikipedia- ordered-by-judge-to-break-confidentiality-of-contributor.html
is a news story about the British High Court ordering the WMF to disclose an IP number of an editor. This is in line with the statement of the Privacy Policy, as I read it. What other instances do we know of?
Charles
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 4:31 AM, Charles Matthews charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com wrote:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/wikipedia/6710237/Wikipedia- ordered-by-judge-to-break-confidentiality-of-contributor.html
Hmm, how long do we reckon their identities will remain private? 3 days? A week, tops?
Steve
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 12:41 PM, Steve Bennett stevagewp@gmail.com wrote:
Hmm, how long do we reckon their identities will remain private? 3 days? A week, tops?
Steve
Not to mention the private information they wish to suppress. The fact that this confidential information, which they do not want disclosed, refers to a mother and her child suggests certain categories of possible facts.
The order makes it clear that there is two parts to the information suppressed: first, that there is some allegation of impropriety with an expense account and second, that there is sensitive information that relates to the child and that the father (or husband) is not a party to the case. I'm sure someone on Wikipedia Review will do the relevant digging and publish the whole story in short order.
Nathan
2009/12/2 Steve Bennett stevagewp@gmail.com:
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 4:31 AM, Charles Matthews charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com wrote:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/wikipedia/6710237/Wikipedia- ordered-by-judge-to-break-confidentiality-of-contributor.html
Hmm, how long do we reckon their identities will remain private? 3 days? A week, tops?
Steve
Indefinitely. UK media already decided not to touch it and from what we can tell the person isn't notable enough for any other media community to care. We delete too much stuff for it to be traceable from digging through our logs. I can't see whoever actually did the deletion leaking it.
Someone was being a [[WP:DICK]]. We have no reason to hope they are successful.