Hello,
During the last board meeting, the board approved the following resolution
The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees will amend its privacy policy to notify, when possible, those members of the community whose personally identifiable data has been sought through, or produced as a result of, civil or criminal legal process, except when such notification is forbidden by state or federal law in the United States of America.
This change of policy was suggested early march by Nsk92, following the Video Professor incident. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28policy%29/Archive_25#... After I was informed of this request, I added it on the board agenda and asked Mike Godwin to come with an appropriate text.
As a matter of interest, I had asked Mike to review entirely, and to work on a full update of our privacy policy. We should expect a full draft for this summer. However, I felt that this little update could anticipate the brand new summer version.
Thanks
Florence
On Fri, 2008-05-09 at 01:53 +0200, Florence Devouard wrote:
Hello,
During the last board meeting, the board approved the following resolution
The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees will amend its privacy policy to notify, when possible, those members of the community whose personally identifiable data has been sought through, or produced as a result of, civil or criminal legal process, except when such notification is forbidden by state or federal law in the United States of America.
This change of policy was suggested early march by Nsk92, following the Video Professor incident.
Cool. I remember this either at the time it came up, or some other earlier incident which resulted in such a proposal.
Question : will the notification occur before WMF actually produce the information so that the member of the community can challenge the information request through whatever legal process that may be available to them?
KTC
Kwan Ting Chan wrote:
On Fri, 2008-05-09 at 01:53 +0200, Florence Devouard wrote:
Hello,
During the last board meeting, the board approved the following resolution
The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees will amend its privacy policy to notify, when possible, those members of the community whose personally identifiable data has been sought through, or produced as a result of, civil or criminal legal process, except when such notification is forbidden by state or federal law in the United States of America.
This change of policy was suggested early march by Nsk92, following the Video Professor incident.
Cool. I remember this either at the time it came up, or some other earlier incident which resulted in such a proposal.
Question : will the notification occur before WMF actually produce the information so that the member of the community can challenge the information request through whatever legal process that may be available to them?
The resolution covers both the case where information has only "been sought", as well as where it has been "produced" already. It also acknowledges that in some cases the notice itself may be forbidden (compare the recent news story about the Internet Archive, which successfully resisted an FBI attempt to extract information, but was forbidden to disclose it while the matter was being litigated). Otherwise, clearly we would prefer to notify affected parties prior to producing information, but given the varied circumstances that might lead to such a request, we cannot promise this in every situation.
--Michael Snow
On Thu, 2008-05-08 at 18:32 -0700, Michael Snow wrote:
Question : will the notification occur before WMF actually produce the information so that the member of the community can challenge the information request through whatever legal process that may be available to them?
The resolution covers both the case where information has only "been sought", as well as where it has been "produced" already. It also acknowledges that in some cases the notice itself may be forbidden (compare the recent news story about the Internet Archive, which successfully resisted an FBI attempt to extract information, but was forbidden to disclose it while the matter was being litigated). Otherwise, clearly we would prefer to notify affected parties prior to producing information, but given the varied circumstances that might lead to such a request, we cannot promise this in every situation.
My question did have the implicit assumption that the foundation are legally able to notify the member before the information were produced. Thanks for the response.
KTC
Just as a matter of interest: roughly how many of these cases are there (currently) per year?
Is it already clear what would be done in case person A's information has been sought, but person A has no other communication methods available other then talkpage? Would this mean the notification would be posted there? (I guess I would not very much appreciate posting that kind of things to my talk page, but maybe others think otherwise of it) I assume it is a detail, but not something that would occur very rarely I guess...
BR, Lodewijk
2008/5/9 Florence Devouard anthere@anthere.org:
Hello,
During the last board meeting, the board approved the following resolution
The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees will amend its privacy policy to notify, when possible, those members of the community whose personally identifiable data has been sought through, or produced as a result of, civil or criminal legal process, except when such notification is forbidden by state or federal law in the United States of America.
This change of policy was suggested early march by Nsk92, following the Video Professor incident. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28policy%29/Archive_25#... After I was informed of this request, I added it on the board agenda and asked Mike Godwin to come with an appropriate text.
As a matter of interest, I had asked Mike to review entirely, and to work on a full update of our privacy policy. We should expect a full draft for this summer. However, I felt that this little update could anticipate the brand new summer version.
Thanks
Florence
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Is it already clear what would be done in case person A's information has been sought, but person A has no other communication methods available other then talkpage? Would this mean the notification would be posted there? (I guess I would not very much appreciate posting that kind of things to my talk page, but maybe others think otherwise of it) I assume it is a detail, but not something that would occur very rarely I guess...
talkpage is not notifying a person, but notifying whole community. the real valid way we have of notifying people is by email they specify in their account.
I suppose one could use a talk page to ask someone to activate their email.
-Robert Rohde
On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 2:19 AM, Domas Mituzas midom.lists@gmail.com wrote:
Is it already clear what would be done in case person A's information has been sought, but person A has no other communication methods available other then talkpage? Would this mean the notification would be posted there? (I guess I would not very much appreciate posting that kind of things to my talk page, but maybe others think otherwise of it) I assume it is a detail, but not something that would occur very rarely I guess...
talkpage is not notifying a person, but notifying whole community. the real valid way we have of notifying people is by email they specify in their account.
-- Domas Mituzas -- http://dammit.lt/ -- [[user:midom]]
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
2008/5/9 Robert Rohde rarohde@gmail.com:
I suppose one could use a talk page to ask someone to activate their email.
-Robert Rohde
That would still imply to the community that someone is falling under this policy, and that the user is therefore "sought", something I'd rather prefer to remain private information instead of public knowledge :)
BR, Lodewijk
Pfew, thanks for clarifying :)
2008/5/9 Domas Mituzas midom.lists@gmail.com:
Is it already clear what would be done in case person A's information has been sought, but person A has no other communication methods available other then talkpage? Would this mean the notification would be posted there? (I guess I would not very much appreciate posting that kind of things to my talk page, but maybe others think otherwise of it) I assume it is a detail, but not something that would occur very rarely I guess...
talkpage is not notifying a person, but notifying whole community. the real valid way we have of notifying people is by email they specify in their account.
-- Domas Mituzas -- http://dammit.lt/ -- [[user:midom]]
I am kind of concerned (not with the change btw). Basically if I wanted to learn the IP of a user I dislike, all I need to do is file a criminal charge? How does it work? - White Cat
On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 2:53 AM, Florence Devouard anthere@anthere.org wrote:
Hello,
During the last board meeting, the board approved the following resolution
The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees will amend its privacy policy to notify, when possible, those members of the community whose personally identifiable data has been sought through, or produced as a result of, civil or criminal legal process, except when such notification is forbidden by state or federal law in the United States of America.
This change of policy was suggested early march by Nsk92, following the Video Professor incident.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28policy%29/Archive_25#... After I was informed of this request, I added it on the board agenda and asked Mike Godwin to come with an appropriate text.
As a matter of interest, I had asked Mike to review entirely, and to work on a full update of our privacy policy. We should expect a full draft for this summer. However, I felt that this little update could anticipate the brand new summer version.
Thanks
Florence
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
A more specific question than what White Cat wrote below would be this: In what situations does the WMF disclose information? Only as the result of a subpoena? In response to a national security letter? To a non-binding request from law enforcement (assuming that, in some locales, a request other than a subpoena may be binding)?
I would assume that a request from a private lawyer for information relevant to litigation which has not resulted in a subpoena valid in the United States would not be honored? Somewhat relevant to me personally, as a matter of fact, as I have reason to expect such a request for my information.
Nathan
On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 11:30 AM, White Cat wikipedia.kawaii.neko@gmail.com wrote:
I am kind of concerned (not with the change btw). Basically if I wanted to learn the IP of a user I dislike, all I need to do is file a criminal charge? How does it work?
- White Cat
Just to clear things out, although I think I know the answer, what about regular users' request to arbcoms etc? Are checkusers going to be obliged to disclose that too? Or only if the request is made to the *foundation*? (I think it is the latter, but please confirm :) )
BR, Lodewijk
2008/5/9, Nathan nawrich@gmail.com:
A more specific question than what White Cat wrote below would be this: In what situations does the WMF disclose information? Only as the result of a subpoena? In response to a national security letter? To a non-binding request from law enforcement (assuming that, in some locales, a request other than a subpoena may be binding)?
I would assume that a request from a private lawyer for information relevant to litigation which has not resulted in a subpoena valid in the United States would not be honored? Somewhat relevant to me personally, as a matter of fact, as I have reason to expect such a request for my information.
Nathan
On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 11:30 AM, White Cat wikipedia.kawaii.neko@gmail.com wrote:
I am kind of concerned (not with the change btw). Basically if I wanted to learn the IP of a user I dislike, all I need to do is file a criminal charge? How does it work?
- White Cat
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On 5/9/08, White Cat wikipedia.kawaii.neko@gmail.com wrote:
I am kind of concerned (not with the change btw). Basically if I wanted to learn the IP of a user I dislike, all I need to do is file a criminal charge? How does it work?
You need to file a criminal or civil case, send a subpoena to Wikimedia, convince a judge not to quash the subpoena, and then convince the judge not to punish you for filing false charges or a frivolous lawsuit.
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org