but that does make sense in some ways as you'd expect the WMF legal be able
to review most written issues and deal with initial contact issues. As an
issue deepens then its only logical to have legal hand over the case to a
local practitioner who is licensed and has the depth of knowledge specific
to jurisdiction and speciality in which they operate something the WMF cant
do in 190 odd countries with countless more subnational entities.
On 30 May 2016 at 05:47, Trillium Corsage <trillium2014(a)yandex.com> wrote:
19.05.2016, 17:25, "Chris Keating" <email
clipped>:
<clipped for brevity>
I'd like to second this question - 1.7M is a
very significant sum and I
am
surprised that WMF has reason to spend this much
on legal services (I had
the impression that the WMF legal department handled most things
themselves).
I was surprised how little WMF Legal do themselves. When a legal matter
comes up, it seems what they do is find a law firm to pay to handle it.
This happened in the case of Yank Berry, vocalist of 60s rock and roll
group the Kingsmen (Louie Louie, etc.), who was astounded at the edits at
his article by editors and administrators who very openly said on-wiki
their intent was to portray him as a swindler and someone of low moral
character. Mr. Berry credibly threatened a libel lawsuit and WMF Legal
reacted by hiring some law firm to defend the editors.
What WMF Legal seems to do itself is modify and update the terms of
service, give advise to the board, coordinate with WMF Trust and Safety in
the banning of certain editors, and handle routine inquiries.
Trillium Corsage
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>