A study claiming that YouTube costs them ONE BEEEELION DOLLARS a year,
by having DMCA safe harbours!
The conceit here is the music industry claiming that YouTube should
pay them money that they literally know YouTube isn't taking in, on an
assured basis as they do with Spotify.
They have been smart enough to explicitly name Wikipedia as the sort
of organisation they don't want to hurt. Wikimedians, of course, know
better than to trust the IP industry with anything. This "study" is
getting hyped in the industry press today; if it comes to anything, it
*may* be worth Wikimedia commenting.
My name is Josh Minor, and I am the Product Manager for the Wikipedia iOS
app. I wanted to speak to a couple specific issues and misunderstandings
raised by this email thread.
First, please take a look at
provides some background on this decision. Jonatan linked to it, and it
covers several of the concerns raised on the thread and gives our
reasoning. I'd also suggest subscribing to this ticket:
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T157763 which Jonatan filed, and where
you can track efforts and issues with replacement maps.
A few clarifying points:
1. The Places tab, and its use of Apple’s maps tiles, is not part of the
articles or article display, it is a navigational aid to help you find
articles. This doesn’t mean it’s exempt from considerations raised here,
but just want to clarify that this is not about editor created maps in
projects, but rather an app-specific discovery mechanism.
Wikimedia Foundation's Legal department before entering beta. The App’s
access to the users’ geolocation to recommend nearby articles, with the
users’ explicit consent, is already part of both apps. The new feature
merely adds a different way to visually view nearby articles - the user
must, as before, still provide explicit consent for the App to access their
geolocation. Users can always turn on or off the provision of their
geolocation via their iPhone location settings.
The feature also makes requests to Apple’s map tile servers for display on
the App. These tiles may or may not be near the actual location of the
user. It doesn’t involve sending Apple the articles you read or anything
about your Wikipedia usage. Apple has public statements and documentation
to explain how their maps service preserves privacy by using a
randomized and frequently changing device ID to request the maps, by not
tracking users over time, and by not building map usage profiles of users.
Overall, Apple’s data collection practices are governed by their privacy
policy , which users must agree to order to use their iPhones.
We plan to further expand the explanation in the FAQ/privacy section of the
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Apps/Team/iOS/Maps_service page in
the next day or so.
3. As stated by others on this thread, the issue at hand is the feasibility
and usability of a libre maps tile server, and impacts on users and how it
reflects (or doesn’t) the values of Wikimedians. The rest of the work on
this feature (such as the time spent on search, visually clustering items
on the map, a list view of nearby landmarks, and the Wikipedia article
pins) will be applicable, independent of the map provider. In fact, I’d
estimate the engineer doing the work spent more time on hacking to try to
make a combination of MapBox and Wikimedia tiles work, than he did/will on
integrating/removing Apple maps.
4. This feature was announced on the Wikimedia Blog, described in an
initial MediaWiki.org page, all work was documented and tracked on
Phabricator (including an initial tech investigation, the request to remove
Apple Maps during development, and the overall feature) and then the
decision to push into beta with Apple Maps further documented on
In conclusion, I would like to thank you for the feedback and the
opportunity to engage in a civil discussion about these important issues.
Again, if you are interested in the next steps, I’d invite you to subscribe
and comment on the phab ticket https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T157763 or
the MediaWiki.org page.
 Design specification: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T130889
---------- Mensaje reenviado ----------
De: "María Sefidari" <msefidari(a)wikimedia.org>
Fecha: 29 mar. 2017 15:06
Asunto: Wikimedia Foundation's commitment around our environmental impact
Para: <WMFall(a)lists.wikimedia.org>, <wikimediaannounce-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>,
Since early 2015, the Wikimedia Foundation has been evaluating efforts
and engaging in discussions related to the environmental impact of the
movement, and specifically the Foundation. During that time, we
supported improvements to our on-wiki documentation, talked with
members of the community, and began reviewing internal processes.
The Wikimedia Foundation is committed to finding ways to reduce the
impact of our activities on the environment. We aim to always act as
responsibly and sustainably as possible, including favoring renewable
energy where it is available for our operations.
To help clarify and solidify our intentions in this important matter,
the Board of Trustees has passed an environmental impact
resolution. This resolution commits the Wikimedia Foundation to:
1. Seek out information about our overall impact on the environment
and then work to minimize it;
2. Consider sustainability as an important part of decisions around
servers, operations, travel, offices, and other procurement;
3. Use green energy where it is available and a prudent use of resources;
4. Starting in 2018, include an environmental impact statement in our
We appreciate the input of the nearly 200 Wikimedians that have
already spoken to this in on Meta-Wiki, and hope that you will join
future efforts to minimize any negative impacts on the environment.
María and Christophe
María Sefidari, Board Vice Chair, Wikimedia Foundation
Christophe Henner, Board Chair, Wikimedia Foundation
We are reaching out to any Wikimedians or WMF staffers that might be at the
Wikimedia mothership in San Francisco today. We are meeting at Noisebridge
hackerspace/makerspace (near 16th ST BART in SF) tonight and everybody is
Details and RSVP (helps us figure out the food and if you need any special
food or have special needs):
(RSVP is optional, but encouraged)
Hope to see you there! Wayne Calhoon (co-organizer)
on the german wikipedia there was a poll to ban images of users who
send cease and desist letters, triggered by a recent case of thomas
wolf trying to charge 1200 euro out of a tiny non-profit which
improperly reused one of his images . thomas article work includs
"improving text deserts, and changing bad images to (often his own)
better quality images". there is a broad majority against people
who use cease and desist letters as a business model. anyway a small
number of persons do have such a business model, some of them even
administrators on commons, like alexander savin .
but the topic of course is much more subtle than described above, the
discussion was heated, and the result close - as always in the last 10
years. a digital divide between persons supporting the original
mindset of wikipedia which sees every additional reuse, unrestricted,
as success, and the ones who think it is not desired to incorrectly
reference, or feel that others should not make money out of their
as both are viable opinions would it be possible to split commons in
two, for every opinion? the new commons would include safe licenses
like cc-4.0 and users who are friendly to update their licenses to
better ones in future. the old commons would just stay as it is. a
user of wikipedia can easy distinguish if she wants to include both
sources, or only one of them? there is only one goal: make cease and
desist letters as business model not interesting any more,
technically, while keeping the morale of contributors high, both