Hi
The US seems to me like an increasingly unsafe and unstable place to store data and servers from a privacy- and political perspective.
Do you have any plans to replicate or move the servers to datacenters in Europe or elsewhere to protect the community from the risks introduced by the american political system?
See https:// youtu.be/mUQ56Tf22pg and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Forum#Strong_Preservation_of_Wikip....
Cheers so9q
Which political system would you prefer, so9q? Just a quick survey finds a shortage of totally ideal alternatives with no objectionable political activity in recent years.
On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 6:20 PM so9q@riseup.net wrote:
Hi
The US seems to me like an increasingly unsafe and unstable place to store data and servers from a privacy- and political perspective.
Do you have any plans to replicate or move the servers to datacenters in Europe or elsewhere to protect the community from the risks introduced by the american political system?
See https:// youtu.be/mUQ56Tf22pg and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Forum#Strong_Preservation_of_Wikip... .
Cheers so9q
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Agreed. This is a perennial issue.
I believe options are going to be explored for sustainability but right now legally speaking the US is the best jurisdiction for hosting us now and the foreseeable future.
Seddon
On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 11:30 PM Nathan nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
Which political system would you prefer, so9q? Just a quick survey finds a shortage of totally ideal alternatives with no objectionable political activity in recent years.
On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 6:20 PM so9q@riseup.net wrote:
Hi
The US seems to me like an increasingly unsafe and unstable place to store data and servers from a privacy- and political perspective.
Do you have any plans to replicate or move the servers to datacenters in Europe or elsewhere to protect the community from the risks introduced by the american political system?
See https:// youtu.be/mUQ56Tf22pg and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Forum#Strong_Preservation_of_Wikip...
.
Cheers so9q
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 3:36 PM Joseph Seddon josephseddon@gmail.com wrote:
I believe options are going to be explored for sustainability but right now legally speaking the US is the best jurisdiction for hosting us now
Certainly.
and the foreseeable future.
I can't foresee the future. But Trump's first term in office is very troubling. Relentless attacks on journalists, escalation of political violence, attempts to undermine Section 230 protections, attempts to remove apps from app stores by Executive Order, etc. -- checked by a judiciary that's increasingly aligned with the Trump agenda. That's the United States today. From this we can extrapolate plausible scenarios in which the question where to locate Wikimedia's core assets could become the single most urgent strategic question the movement faces.
I hope that some preliminary contingency plans exist or are being developed, and I'm sure that the movement-wide debate will widen if the US continues its downward slide into authoritarianism.
Erik
On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 09:49, Erik Moeller eloquence@gmail.com wrote:
I hope that some preliminary contingency plans exist or are being developed, and I'm sure that the movement-wide debate will widen if the US continues its downward slide into authoritarianism.
I agree with Erik. Even under the Obama administration, there were threats to the existence of the movement, such as SOPA [1] which lead to a blackout [2]. One can extrapolate from current events that these threats could well get larger and more frequent, rather than smaller and less frequent, should someone in the US Government decide to focus their attention on attacking Wikipedia and free knowledge. It would be prudent to create a contingency plan which includes an exploration of other options for a location of operation for the Wikimedia Foundation and/or its servers, with their advantages and disadvantages. I personally wouldn't necessarily advocate for making the plan public; that would be ideal, but I'd be comforted merely to know it exists.
On Tue, 29 Sep 2020 at 23:36, Joseph Seddon josephseddon@gmail.com wrote:
I believe options are going to be explored for sustainability but right now legally speaking the US is the best jurisdiction for hosting us now and the foreseeable future.
I agree with this too. For now, the United States remains the best place for the organisation to operate out of, and a move should not be actively considered.
Dan
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_SOPA_and_PIPA#Wikimedia_commu...
Hi all,
We have had discussions on this with many Wikimedians over the years, but frankly, the issue never seemed pressing enough to pursue more seriously. Some points made that I remember where:
- Perhaps it is enough to just have back-up servers in another jurisdictions that could kick-in and whose capacity could quickly be upgraded in case of need. - Nordic jurisdictions like Iceland and Norway frequently came up with the arguments: stable political systems, solid digital rights track records, a climate that helps save energy on cooling servers & availability of hydropower (i.e. environmental benefits).
I think such a move would require serious studies and long, community-wide debates. I can not assess how urgent it is. But then again, waiting until it is a real issue is probably not a great idea.
Cheers, Dimi
На ср, 30.09.2020 г. в 11:35 Dan Garry (Deskana) djgwiki@gmail.com написа:
On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 09:49, Erik Moeller eloquence@gmail.com wrote:
I hope that some preliminary contingency plans exist or are being developed, and I'm sure that the movement-wide debate will widen if the US continues its downward slide into authoritarianism.
I agree with Erik. Even under the Obama administration, there were threats to the existence of the movement, such as SOPA [1] which lead to a blackout [2]. One can extrapolate from current events that these threats could well get larger and more frequent, rather than smaller and less frequent, should someone in the US Government decide to focus their attention on attacking Wikipedia and free knowledge. It would be prudent to create a contingency plan which includes an exploration of other options for a location of operation for the Wikimedia Foundation and/or its servers, with their advantages and disadvantages. I personally wouldn't necessarily advocate for making the plan public; that would be ideal, but I'd be comforted merely to know it exists.
On Tue, 29 Sep 2020 at 23:36, Joseph Seddon josephseddon@gmail.com wrote:
I believe options are going to be explored for sustainability but right
now
legally speaking the US is the best jurisdiction for hosting us now and
the
foreseeable future.
I agree with this too. For now, the United States remains the best place for the organisation to operate out of, and a move should not be actively considered.
Dan
[2]:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_SOPA_and_PIPA#Wikimedia_commu... _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
I agree there does a appear to be a need for the WMF and Board to consider a contingency plan, does it need to be public? I'm not as convinced.
Privacy is just one of many questions that would have to be addressed, with that being said it's important. There are other equally important needs from copyright to freedom of speech to financial to social and political stability.
When it comes to privacy how many of us are using, Google, Microsoft, Apple products, or even other services that have a global presence. While many of us are concerned about the potential for political actions every country is grappling with the corporate, tax, and privacy issues related to these companies as well. Politically Trump style leadership is a concern, not just in the USA but right across what were politically stable countries.
It'd be remiss of the WMF if they already didn't have alternative servers(I know they do) and backups outside San Francisco, and Florida given the susceptibility of both locations to natural disasters and climate change issues. All of these make it beyond the capability of the community to effectively evaluate in a public forum like this. The best the community this can do in this space is to give support to the WMF and the Board to explore, evaluate, and follow the dynamics of political realities of where a move could go because any change will need to be immediately effective, If was to become necessary to take such actions to protect the movement and knowledge we have collected a long drawn out debate will be out of the questions, and decisions made today, this month, this year could in all likelihood be just as invalid.
On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 18:01, Dimitar Parvanov Dimitrov < dimitar.parvanov.dimitrov@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi all,
We have had discussions on this with many Wikimedians over the years, but frankly, the issue never seemed pressing enough to pursue more seriously. Some points made that I remember where:
- Perhaps it is enough to just have back-up servers in another
jurisdictions that could kick-in and whose capacity could quickly be upgraded in case of need.
- Nordic jurisdictions like Iceland and Norway frequently came up with
the arguments: stable political systems, solid digital rights track records, a climate that helps save energy on cooling servers & availability of hydropower (i.e. environmental benefits).
I think such a move would require serious studies and long, community-wide debates. I can not assess how urgent it is. But then again, waiting until it is a real issue is probably not a great idea.
Cheers, Dimi
На ср, 30.09.2020 г. в 11:35 Dan Garry (Deskana) djgwiki@gmail.com написа:
On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 09:49, Erik Moeller eloquence@gmail.com wrote:
I hope that some preliminary contingency plans exist or are being developed, and I'm sure that the movement-wide debate will widen if the US continues its downward slide into authoritarianism.
I agree with Erik. Even under the Obama administration, there were
threats
to the existence of the movement, such as SOPA [1] which lead to a
blackout
[2]. One can extrapolate from current events that these threats could
well
get larger and more frequent, rather than smaller and less frequent,
should
someone in the US Government decide to focus their attention on attacking Wikipedia and free knowledge. It would be prudent to create a contingency plan which includes an exploration of other options for a location of operation for the Wikimedia Foundation and/or its servers, with their advantages and disadvantages. I personally wouldn't necessarily advocate for making the plan public; that would be ideal, but I'd be comforted merely to know it exists.
On Tue, 29 Sep 2020 at 23:36, Joseph Seddon josephseddon@gmail.com wrote:
I believe options are going to be explored for sustainability but right
now
legally speaking the US is the best jurisdiction for hosting us now and
the
foreseeable future.
I agree with this too. For now, the United States remains the best place for the organisation to operate out of, and a move should not be actively considered.
Dan
[2]:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_SOPA_and_PIPA#Wikimedia_commu...
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Hi all,
as Dimi said, there had been some discussions about this topic over the years. Unfortunately they were not taken for serious, for example https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Move_the_WMF_and_Server... .
And there is not only the political issue, there are environmental concerns as well. Earthquakes and fires in California, Hurricanes in the South.
Cheers, Gereon
Am 30.09.2020 um 11:44 schrieb Dimitar Parvanov Dimitrov:
Hi all,
We have had discussions on this with many Wikimedians over the years, but frankly, the issue never seemed pressing enough to pursue more seriously. Some points made that I remember where:
- Perhaps it is enough to just have back-up servers in another jurisdictions that could kick-in and whose capacity could quickly be upgraded in case of need. - Nordic jurisdictions like Iceland and Norway frequently came up with the arguments: stable political systems, solid digital rights track records, a climate that helps save energy on cooling servers & availability of hydropower (i.e. environmental benefits).I think such a move would require serious studies and long, community-wide debates. I can not assess how urgent it is. But then again, waiting until it is a real issue is probably not a great idea.
Cheers, Dimi
На ср, 30.09.2020 г. в 11:35 Dan Garry (Deskana) djgwiki@gmail.com написа:
On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 09:49, Erik Moeller eloquence@gmail.com wrote:
I hope that some preliminary contingency plans exist or are being developed, and I'm sure that the movement-wide debate will widen if the US continues its downward slide into authoritarianism.
I agree with Erik. Even under the Obama administration, there were threats to the existence of the movement, such as SOPA [1] which lead to a blackout [2]. One can extrapolate from current events that these threats could well get larger and more frequent, rather than smaller and less frequent, should someone in the US Government decide to focus their attention on attacking Wikipedia and free knowledge. It would be prudent to create a contingency plan which includes an exploration of other options for a location of operation for the Wikimedia Foundation and/or its servers, with their advantages and disadvantages. I personally wouldn't necessarily advocate for making the plan public; that would be ideal, but I'd be comforted merely to know it exists.
On Tue, 29 Sep 2020 at 23:36, Joseph Seddon josephseddon@gmail.com wrote:
I believe options are going to be explored for sustainability but right
now
legally speaking the US is the best jurisdiction for hosting us now and
the
foreseeable future.
I agree with this too. For now, the United States remains the best place for the organisation to operate out of, and a move should not be actively considered.
Dan
[2]:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_SOPA_and_PIPA#Wikimedia_commu... _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Hi all,
Maybe one way in France : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renater
I could contact them if it s possible, and more particularly the criann he would only charge for electricity. At the same time this allows to be able to save energy for users who consult wikipedia in Europe.
Le 2020-09-30 13:12, Gereon Kalkuhl a écrit :
Hi all,
as Dimi said, there had been some discussions about this topic over the years. Unfortunately they were not taken for serious, for example https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Move_the_WMF_and_Server... .
And there is not only the political issue, there are environmental concerns as well. Earthquakes and fires in California, Hurricanes in the South.
Cheers, Gereon
Am 30.09.2020 um 11:44 schrieb Dimitar Parvanov Dimitrov: Hi all,
We have had discussions on this with many Wikimedians over the years, but frankly, the issue never seemed pressing enough to pursue more seriously. Some points made that I remember where:
- Perhaps it is enough to just have back-up servers in another
jurisdictions that could kick-in and whose capacity could quickly be upgraded in case of need.
- Nordic jurisdictions like Iceland and Norway frequently came up with
the arguments: stable political systems, solid digital rights track records, a climate that helps save energy on cooling servers & availability of hydropower (i.e. environmental benefits).
I think such a move would require serious studies and long, community-wide debates. I can not assess how urgent it is. But then again, waiting until it is a real issue is probably not a great idea.
Cheers, Dimi
На ср, 30.09.2020 г. в 11:35 Dan Garry (Deskana) djgwiki@gmail.com написа:
On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 09:49, Erik Moeller eloquence@gmail.com wrote:
I hope that some preliminary contingency plans exist or are being developed, and I'm sure that the movement-wide debate will widen if the US continues its downward slide into authoritarianism.
I agree with Erik. Even under the Obama administration, there were threats to the existence of the movement, such as SOPA [1 [1]] which lead to a blackout [2]. One can extrapolate from current events that these threats could well get larger and more frequent, rather than smaller and less frequent, should someone in the US Government decide to focus their attention on attacking Wikipedia and free knowledge. It would be prudent to create a contingency plan which includes an exploration of other options for a location of operation for the Wikimedia Foundation and/or its servers, with their advantages and disadvantages. I personally wouldn't necessarily advocate for making the plan public; that would be ideal, but I'd be comforted merely to know it exists.
On Tue, 29 Sep 2020 at 23:36, Joseph Seddon josephseddon@gmail.com wrote:
I believe options are going to be explored for sustainability but right now legally speaking the US is the best jurisdiction for hosting us now and the foreseeable future.
I agree with this too. For now, the United States remains the best place for the organisation to operate out of, and a move should not be actively considered.
Dan
[2]:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_SOPA_and_PIPA#Wikimedia_commu... _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
On 30/09/2020 13:55, Pascal Martin wrote:
Hi all, Maybe one way in France : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renater I could contact them if it s possible, and more particularly the criann he would only charge for electricity. At the same time this allows to be able to save energy for users who consult wikipedia in Europe.
Hello,
Wikimedia has caches servers located in Amsterdam in the same facility of AMSIX which is one of the largest internet exchange point in Europe. The caches thus have a very good connectivity with all the major internet service provider in Europe (and beyond).
France several exchange points (France-IX, PARIX, SFINX which is operated by renater) and possibly others. But to my knowledge none offer the same amount of connectivity as AMSIX.
Beside privacy, hosting would have to obey to french laws and the copyright laws are entirely different than the one in the USA. On top of my mind: there is no such thing as "fair use" and no "freedom of panorama".
Surely laws can be changed by intense lobbying and could I see the use case for France to relax some copyrights laws to better accommodate hosting. That could potentially attract a wide range of content that are seeking a safe copyright heaven. But I don't see it happening anytime soon and that would require a lot of lobbying by a wide range of organizations beside just Wikimedia.
<fiction> Maybe WMF CEO can try giving a call to french president and see whether some arrangement can be made :-] </fiction>
Good evening Antoine,
France is a country full of laws which are not respected, it is the old continent that you want :) Ex: it was not until 2013 that women could wear pants in Paris, and I assure you that women wore pants before that date.
https://www.liberation.fr/france/2013/02/04/le-pantalon-n-est-plus-interdit-...
More seriously and from my personal experience for which for more than 12 years the data of all the projects of the WMF and in all the languages as well as the content of the source links are hosted at Criann, the Criann and I even have never had any problem in court.
Regarding confidentiality, my servers are locked in a room which is also locked; only authorized persons can physically access the server rooms which are partitioned.
From my point of view, I think the risk is to be measured by the Criann, because we are talking about making Wikipedia resilient, if the Criann accepts the risk apart from controversies there will be only that.
Even so, I think it is for the wikipedia community to rule on this point, even if the mandate of the WMF is to host Wikipedia, it does not say that the community is not positioning itself for a less centralized system. than today. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Community_Wishlist_Survey
And to change the law in France, I think that given that the Criann depends on the President of the Region:
<Reality> Maybe le criann can try giving a call to french president of the region normandie and see whether some arrangement can be made: -] </ Reality>
De : Antoine Musso Envoyé le :jeudi 1 octobre 2020 18:17 À : Wikimedia Mailing List; Pascal Martin Objet :Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moving the technical infrastructure out of the US
On 30/09/2020 13:55, Pascal Martin wrote:
Hi all, Maybe one way in France : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renater I could contact them if it s possible, and more particularly the criann he would only charge for electricity. At the same time this allows to be able to save energy for users who consult wikipedia in Europe.
Hello,
Wikimedia has caches servers located in Amsterdam in the same facility of AMSIX which is one of the largest internet exchange point in Europe. The caches thus have a very good connectivity with all the major internet service provider in Europe (and beyond).
France several exchange points (France-IX, PARIX, SFINX which is operated by renater) and possibly others. But to my knowledge none offer the same amount of connectivity as AMSIX.
Beside privacy, hosting would have to obey to french laws and the copyright laws are entirely different than the one in the USA. On top of my mind: there is no such thing as "fair use" and no "freedom of panorama".
Surely laws can be changed by intense lobbying and could I see the use case for France to relax some copyrights laws to better accommodate hosting. That could potentially attract a wide range of content that are seeking a safe copyright heaven. But I don't see it happening anytime soon and that would require a lot of lobbying by a wide range of organizations beside just Wikimedia.
<fiction> Maybe WMF CEO can try giving a call to french president and see whether some arrangement can be made :-] </fiction>
We should have technical partners in multiple other jurisdictions that could help in a crisis, and load bearing infrastructure in at least one of them, and a plan for how and when to switch. (The walkthrough of what would be needed for a smooth transfer send most important, and useful for general reliability planning)
We should also fully support and realize Wikimedia-on-ipfs, similar to what the internet archive had been doing. (Santhosh has some excellent ideas there)
🌍🌏🌎🌑
On Wed., Sep. 30, 2020, 5:35 a.m. Dan Garry (Deskana), djgwiki@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 09:49, Erik Moeller eloquence@gmail.com wrote:
I hope that some preliminary contingency plans exist or are being developed, and I'm sure that the movement-wide debate will widen if the US continues its downward slide into authoritarianism.
I agree with Erik. Even under the Obama administration, there were threats to the existence of the movement, such as SOPA [1] which lead to a blackout [2]. One can extrapolate from current events that these threats could well get larger and more frequent, rather than smaller and less frequent, should someone in the US Government decide to focus their attention on attacking Wikipedia and free knowledge. It would be prudent to create a contingency plan which includes an exploration of other options for a location of operation for the Wikimedia Foundation and/or its servers, with their advantages and disadvantages. I personally wouldn't necessarily advocate for making the plan public; that would be ideal, but I'd be comforted merely to know it exists.
On Tue, 29 Sep 2020 at 23:36, Joseph Seddon josephseddon@gmail.com wrote:
I believe options are going to be explored for sustainability but right
now
legally speaking the US is the best jurisdiction for hosting us now and
the
foreseeable future.
I agree with this too. For now, the United States remains the best place for the organisation to operate out of, and a move should not be actively considered.
Dan
[2]:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_SOPA_and_PIPA#Wikimedia_commu... _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
SJ hinted at a related problem which is that we'd also need a backup organizational structure to run things operationally and legally. If the US becomes so politically unstable that hosting Wikimedia data is under threat there, just moving the data would not be enough. You'd also have to include a contingency plan that foresaw the need to legally operate the Foundation (or an equivalent organization anyway) under a different jurisdiction with corporate officers not subject to US law or extradition. If the servers are hosted in the EU but the legally controlling body and its employees are within the US, you could still see them legally forced to comply with an order, just like companies are forced to do so in other countries with censorious regimes today.
On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 8:59 AM Samuel Klein meta.sj@gmail.com wrote:
We should have technical partners in multiple other jurisdictions that could help in a crisis, and load bearing infrastructure in at least one of them, and a plan for how and when to switch. (The walkthrough of what would be needed for a smooth transfer send most important, and useful for general reliability planning)
We should also fully support and realize Wikimedia-on-ipfs, similar to what the internet archive had been doing. (Santhosh has some excellent ideas there)
🌍🌏🌎🌑
On Wed., Sep. 30, 2020, 5:35 a.m. Dan Garry (Deskana), djgwiki@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 09:49, Erik Moeller eloquence@gmail.com wrote:
I hope that some preliminary contingency plans exist or are being developed, and I'm sure that the movement-wide debate will widen if the US continues its downward slide into authoritarianism.
I agree with Erik. Even under the Obama administration, there were
threats
to the existence of the movement, such as SOPA [1] which lead to a
blackout
[2]. One can extrapolate from current events that these threats could
well
get larger and more frequent, rather than smaller and less frequent,
should
someone in the US Government decide to focus their attention on attacking Wikipedia and free knowledge. It would be prudent to create a contingency plan which includes an exploration of other options for a location of operation for the Wikimedia Foundation and/or its servers, with their advantages and disadvantages. I personally wouldn't necessarily advocate for making the plan public; that would be ideal, but I'd be comforted merely to know it exists.
On Tue, 29 Sep 2020 at 23:36, Joseph Seddon josephseddon@gmail.com wrote:
I believe options are going to be explored for sustainability but right
now
legally speaking the US is the best jurisdiction for hosting us now and
the
foreseeable future.
I agree with this too. For now, the United States remains the best place for the organisation to operate out of, and a move should not be actively considered.
Dan
[2]:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_SOPA_and_PIPA#Wikimedia_commu...
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
… hence the existence of Wikimedia chapters? I suspect at least WMDE could take this on if it becomes necessary, although other chapters aren’t as technologically developed as I’d have liked to have seen.
Thanks, Mike
On 30 Sep 2020, at 19:35, Steven Walling steven.walling@gmail.com wrote:
SJ hinted at a related problem which is that we'd also need a backup organizational structure to run things operationally and legally. If the US becomes so politically unstable that hosting Wikimedia data is under threat there, just moving the data would not be enough. You'd also have to include a contingency plan that foresaw the need to legally operate the Foundation (or an equivalent organization anyway) under a different jurisdiction with corporate officers not subject to US law or extradition. If the servers are hosted in the EU but the legally controlling body and its employees are within the US, you could still see them legally forced to comply with an order, just like companies are forced to do so in other countries with censorious regimes today.
On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 8:59 AM Samuel Klein meta.sj@gmail.com wrote:
We should have technical partners in multiple other jurisdictions that could help in a crisis, and load bearing infrastructure in at least one of them, and a plan for how and when to switch. (The walkthrough of what would be needed for a smooth transfer send most important, and useful for general reliability planning)
We should also fully support and realize Wikimedia-on-ipfs, similar to what the internet archive had been doing. (Santhosh has some excellent ideas there)
🌍🌏🌎🌑
On Wed., Sep. 30, 2020, 5:35 a.m. Dan Garry (Deskana), djgwiki@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 09:49, Erik Moeller eloquence@gmail.com wrote:
I hope that some preliminary contingency plans exist or are being developed, and I'm sure that the movement-wide debate will widen if the US continues its downward slide into authoritarianism.
I agree with Erik. Even under the Obama administration, there were
threats
to the existence of the movement, such as SOPA [1] which lead to a
blackout
[2]. One can extrapolate from current events that these threats could
well
get larger and more frequent, rather than smaller and less frequent,
should
someone in the US Government decide to focus their attention on attacking Wikipedia and free knowledge. It would be prudent to create a contingency plan which includes an exploration of other options for a location of operation for the Wikimedia Foundation and/or its servers, with their advantages and disadvantages. I personally wouldn't necessarily advocate for making the plan public; that would be ideal, but I'd be comforted merely to know it exists.
On Tue, 29 Sep 2020 at 23:36, Joseph Seddon josephseddon@gmail.com wrote:
I believe options are going to be explored for sustainability but right
now
legally speaking the US is the best jurisdiction for hosting us now and
the
foreseeable future.
I agree with this too. For now, the United States remains the best place for the organisation to operate out of, and a move should not be actively considered.
Dan
[2]:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_SOPA_and_PIPA#Wikimedia_commu...
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Well, to Steven's point that you might need a jurisdiction where corporate officers and employees aren't subject to extradition... I believe Germany does in fact have an extradition treaty with the United States.
So far the criteria I'm hearing from the comments here:
1) Politically stable 2) Liberal political environment 3) Strong protections against government interference in relevant operations 4) Section 230-like protection against liability for user content 5) No natural disasters like fires, floods, hurricanes, volcanoes, etc. 6) Strong technological sophistication - preferably a robust technology industry that can supply local talent for WMF needs 7) Protections in the law for data privacy 8) Availability of renewable energy sources and other resources that allow for operation of the WMF with a low climate impact 9) Tax exemption or beneficial tax structure for receiving international fundings by donation 10) Clear and reliable regulatory framework for a charitable organization 11) Safe - low crime, low-risk of violence for WMF stakeholders and community 12) Free from risk of extradition to the U.S. or other jurisdictions where criminal or civil law might be used against WMF officers or employees
I would guess the list of countries that meet all of these criteria might be short. Norway might hit most of these except the last.
On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 2:44 PM Michael Peel email@mikepeel.net wrote:
… hence the existence of Wikimedia chapters? I suspect at least WMDE could take this on if it becomes necessary, although other chapters aren’t as technologically developed as I’d have liked to have seen.
Thanks, Mike
On 30 Sep 2020, at 19:35, Steven Walling steven.walling@gmail.com
wrote:
SJ hinted at a related problem which is that we'd also need a backup organizational structure to run things operationally and legally. If the
US
becomes so politically unstable that hosting Wikimedia data is under
threat
there, just moving the data would not be enough. You'd also have to
include
a contingency plan that foresaw the need to legally operate the
Foundation
(or an equivalent organization anyway) under a different jurisdiction with corporate officers not subject to US law or extradition. If the servers are hosted in the EU but the legally controlling body and its employees are within the US, you could still see them legally forced to comply with an order, just like companies are forced to do so in other countries with censorious regimes today.
On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 8:59 AM Samuel Klein meta.sj@gmail.com wrote:
We should have technical partners in multiple other jurisdictions that could help in a crisis, and load bearing infrastructure in at least one
of
them, and a plan for how and when to switch. (The walkthrough of what
would
be needed for a smooth transfer send most important, and useful for
general
reliability planning)
We should also fully support and realize Wikimedia-on-ipfs, similar to
what
the internet archive had been doing. (Santhosh has some excellent ideas there)
🌍🌏🌎🌑
On Wed., Sep. 30, 2020, 5:35 a.m. Dan Garry (Deskana), <
djgwiki@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 09:49, Erik Moeller eloquence@gmail.com
wrote:
I hope that some preliminary contingency plans exist or are being developed, and I'm sure that the movement-wide debate will widen if the US continues its downward slide into authoritarianism.
I agree with Erik. Even under the Obama administration, there were
threats
to the existence of the movement, such as SOPA [1] which lead to a
blackout
[2]. One can extrapolate from current events that these threats could
well
get larger and more frequent, rather than smaller and less frequent,
should
someone in the US Government decide to focus their attention on
attacking
Wikipedia and free knowledge. It would be prudent to create a
contingency
plan which includes an exploration of other options for a location of operation for the Wikimedia Foundation and/or its servers, with their advantages and disadvantages. I personally wouldn't necessarily
advocate
for making the plan public; that would be ideal, but I'd be comforted merely to know it exists.
On Tue, 29 Sep 2020 at 23:36, Joseph Seddon josephseddon@gmail.com wrote:
I believe options are going to be explored for sustainability but
right
now
legally speaking the US is the best jurisdiction for hosting us now
and
the
foreseeable future.
I agree with this too. For now, the United States remains the best
place
for the organisation to operate out of, and a move should not be
actively
considered.
Dan
[2]:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_SOPA_and_PIPA#Wikimedia_commu...
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 12:22 PM Nathan nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
Well, to Steven's point that you might need a jurisdiction where corporate officers and employees aren't subject to extradition... I believe Germany does in fact have an extradition treaty with the United States.
The chapters do seem like the obvious potentially viable easy solution here, if WMF set up that contingency plan.
For instance, if WMDE did take over in an emergency, then the critical difference is that Germany doesn't extradite its own citizens to the US. So there'd just have to be a complete handoff of primary hosting to outside the US and some kind of agreement for WMDE (or pick your chapter) to take over operational control. There's probably a lot that real lawyers, of which I am not one, would know better here.
So far the criteria I'm hearing from the comments here:
- Politically stable
- Liberal political environment
- Strong protections against government interference in relevant
operations 4) Section 230-like protection against liability for user content 5) No natural disasters like fires, floods, hurricanes, volcanoes, etc. 6) Strong technological sophistication - preferably a robust technology industry that can supply local talent for WMF needs 7) Protections in the law for data privacy 8) Availability of renewable energy sources and other resources that allow for operation of the WMF with a low climate impact 9) Tax exemption or beneficial tax structure for receiving international fundings by donation 10) Clear and reliable regulatory framework for a charitable organization 11) Safe - low crime, low-risk of violence for WMF stakeholders and community 12) Free from risk of extradition to the U.S. or other jurisdictions where criminal or civil law might be used against WMF officers or employees
I would guess the list of countries that meet all of these criteria might be short. Norway might hit most of these except the last.
The only item that seems more or less impossible is preventing 5 in light of the impacts of climate change. There is no locale on the planet that won't suffer from severe weather and natural disasters, just some (like the poorer countries and anywhere in the tropics) that will see worse impacts. So the only nuance is aiming for more like "Prepared for the event of severe weather and natural disasters" not "none".
On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 2:44 PM Michael Peel email@mikepeel.net wrote:
… hence the existence of Wikimedia chapters? I suspect at least WMDE
could
take this on if it becomes necessary, although other chapters aren’t as technologically developed as I’d have liked to have seen.
Thanks, Mike
On 30 Sep 2020, at 19:35, Steven Walling steven.walling@gmail.com
wrote:
SJ hinted at a related problem which is that we'd also need a backup organizational structure to run things operationally and legally. If
the
US
becomes so politically unstable that hosting Wikimedia data is under
threat
there, just moving the data would not be enough. You'd also have to
include
a contingency plan that foresaw the need to legally operate the
Foundation
(or an equivalent organization anyway) under a different jurisdiction with corporate officers not subject to US law or extradition. If the servers are hosted in the EU but the legally controlling body and its employees are within the US, you could still see them legally forced to comply with an order, just like companies are forced to do so in other countries with censorious regimes today.
On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 8:59 AM Samuel Klein meta.sj@gmail.com
wrote:
We should have technical partners in multiple other jurisdictions that could help in a crisis, and load bearing infrastructure in at least
one
of
them, and a plan for how and when to switch. (The walkthrough of what
would
be needed for a smooth transfer send most important, and useful for
general
reliability planning)
We should also fully support and realize Wikimedia-on-ipfs, similar to
what
the internet archive had been doing. (Santhosh has some excellent
ideas
there)
🌍🌏🌎🌑
On Wed., Sep. 30, 2020, 5:35 a.m. Dan Garry (Deskana), <
djgwiki@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 09:49, Erik Moeller eloquence@gmail.com
wrote:
I hope that some preliminary contingency plans exist or are being developed, and I'm sure that the movement-wide debate will widen if the US continues its downward slide into authoritarianism.
I agree with Erik. Even under the Obama administration, there were
threats
to the existence of the movement, such as SOPA [1] which lead to a
blackout
[2]. One can extrapolate from current events that these threats could
well
get larger and more frequent, rather than smaller and less frequent,
should
someone in the US Government decide to focus their attention on
attacking
Wikipedia and free knowledge. It would be prudent to create a
contingency
plan which includes an exploration of other options for a location of operation for the Wikimedia Foundation and/or its servers, with their advantages and disadvantages. I personally wouldn't necessarily
advocate
for making the plan public; that would be ideal, but I'd be comforted merely to know it exists.
On Tue, 29 Sep 2020 at 23:36, Joseph Seddon josephseddon@gmail.com wrote:
I believe options are going to be explored for sustainability but
right
now
legally speaking the US is the best jurisdiction for hosting us now
and
the
foreseeable future.
I agree with this too. For now, the United States remains the best
place
for the organisation to operate out of, and a move should not be
actively
considered.
Dan
[2]:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_SOPA_and_PIPA#Wikimedia_commu...
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Hi everyone,
Options to mitigate any risks are numerous, especially when it comes to content distribution (private/semi-private/public/delegated/federated/a mix of everything) but given the current context I would restrain from having this as a public / community discussion.
We, community members, would most probably have great inputs but when one is dealing with this kind of topic, designing contingencies plan, one has to be ful of what information can be public. I have no idea whether staff is working on such a topic, and it is better that way.
But we, as community members and awesome human beings, must be mindful of some things:
- The people in charge of that topic are mostly US Citizens. The current political and social climate is most probably draining their energy. Imagine having to manage it both from a personal and professional standpoint. Top that doing it for something as important as our projects. We cannot fathom their anxiety levels and should not add any to it. - Sending email about this topic, they have to read it. They most probably have to discuss, debate and balance whether they should answer or not. Imagine adding that to the first point. - They know for a fact, remember a lot of community members are staff, that community could be helping. But they can't ask for it. - Top all of that with them knowing that whatever course of action they might pick, it comes with a toll. Whether it is to talk about it here, and perhaps hinder their efforts, or not talk about it here and be perceived as ignoring the community. - Top all of that with the stress of trying to do their job in a global pandemic situation that might have them with loved ones at risk. Or with the need to care daily for young / elderly people. - Top that with the fact that they most probably all have relatives that at best are in financial struggle, or health struggles or are managing with the loss of loved ones.
Take a pause. Try to step in that space. Imagine how you would feel. Multiply that by a hundred.
I would recommend we (community members) restrain from talking about it. Perhaps what could be helpful, I am saying could, is for the people that do actually have knowledge on those topics to just say they are available to help if needs be with your area of expertise.
If no one at the Foundation acknowledges this thread or your emails, it is ok. It doesn't mean you are not valued, it means that you are being spared from that weight. We can provide support, but we should be mindful not to increase their current level of stress.
Please all take care of yourselves, loved ones and each other
PS: I said staff, but read it as "anyone with an official Wikimedia Foundation capacity". I know for a fact how those situations can be hard to manage when you are a volunteer board member in the shadow too.
-- Christophe
On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 21:32, Steven Walling steven.walling@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 12:22 PM Nathan nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
Well, to Steven's point that you might need a jurisdiction where
corporate
officers and employees aren't subject to extradition... I believe Germany does in fact have an extradition treaty with the United States.
The chapters do seem like the obvious potentially viable easy solution here, if WMF set up that contingency plan.
For instance, if WMDE did take over in an emergency, then the critical difference is that Germany doesn't extradite its own citizens to the US. So there'd just have to be a complete handoff of primary hosting to outside the US and some kind of agreement for WMDE (or pick your chapter) to take over operational control. There's probably a lot that real lawyers, of which I am not one, would know better here.
So far the criteria I'm hearing from the comments here:
- Politically stable
- Liberal political environment
- Strong protections against government interference in relevant
operations 4) Section 230-like protection against liability for user content 5) No natural disasters like fires, floods, hurricanes, volcanoes, etc. 6) Strong technological sophistication - preferably a robust technology industry that can supply local talent for WMF needs 7) Protections in the law for data privacy 8) Availability of renewable energy sources and other resources that
allow
for operation of the WMF with a low climate impact 9) Tax exemption or beneficial tax structure for receiving international fundings by donation 10) Clear and reliable regulatory framework for a charitable organization 11) Safe - low crime, low-risk of violence for WMF stakeholders and community 12) Free from risk of extradition to the U.S. or other jurisdictions
where
criminal or civil law might be used against WMF officers or employees
I would guess the list of countries that meet all of these criteria might be short. Norway might hit most of these except the last.
The only item that seems more or less impossible is preventing 5 in light of the impacts of climate change. There is no locale on the planet that won't suffer from severe weather and natural disasters, just some (like the poorer countries and anywhere in the tropics) that will see worse impacts. So the only nuance is aiming for more like "Prepared for the event of severe weather and natural disasters" not "none".
On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 2:44 PM Michael Peel email@mikepeel.net wrote:
… hence the existence of Wikimedia chapters? I suspect at least WMDE
could
take this on if it becomes necessary, although other chapters aren’t as technologically developed as I’d have liked to have seen.
Thanks, Mike
On 30 Sep 2020, at 19:35, Steven Walling steven.walling@gmail.com
wrote:
SJ hinted at a related problem which is that we'd also need a backup organizational structure to run things operationally and legally. If
the
US
becomes so politically unstable that hosting Wikimedia data is under
threat
there, just moving the data would not be enough. You'd also have to
include
a contingency plan that foresaw the need to legally operate the
Foundation
(or an equivalent organization anyway) under a different jurisdiction with corporate officers not subject to US law or extradition. If the servers are hosted in the EU but the legally controlling body and its employees are within the US, you could still see them legally forced
to
comply with an order, just like companies are forced to do so in other countries with censorious regimes today.
On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 8:59 AM Samuel Klein meta.sj@gmail.com
wrote:
We should have technical partners in multiple other jurisdictions
that
could help in a crisis, and load bearing infrastructure in at least
one
of
them, and a plan for how and when to switch. (The walkthrough of
what
would
be needed for a smooth transfer send most important, and useful for
general
reliability planning)
We should also fully support and realize Wikimedia-on-ipfs, similar
to
what
the internet archive had been doing. (Santhosh has some excellent
ideas
there)
🌍🌏🌎🌑
On Wed., Sep. 30, 2020, 5:35 a.m. Dan Garry (Deskana), <
djgwiki@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 09:49, Erik Moeller eloquence@gmail.com
wrote:
> I hope that some preliminary contingency plans exist or are being > developed, and I'm sure that the movement-wide debate will widen
if
> the US continues its downward slide into authoritarianism. >
I agree with Erik. Even under the Obama administration, there were
threats
to the existence of the movement, such as SOPA [1] which lead to a
blackout
[2]. One can extrapolate from current events that these threats
could
well
get larger and more frequent, rather than smaller and less
frequent,
should
someone in the US Government decide to focus their attention on
attacking
Wikipedia and free knowledge. It would be prudent to create a
contingency
plan which includes an exploration of other options for a location
of
operation for the Wikimedia Foundation and/or its servers, with
their
advantages and disadvantages. I personally wouldn't necessarily
advocate
for making the plan public; that would be ideal, but I'd be
comforted
merely to know it exists.
On Tue, 29 Sep 2020 at 23:36, Joseph Seddon <
josephseddon@gmail.com>
wrote:
> I believe options are going to be explored for sustainability but
right
now > legally speaking the US is the best jurisdiction for hosting us
now
and
the > foreseeable future. >
I agree with this too. For now, the United States remains the best
place
for the organisation to operate out of, and a move should not be
actively
considered.
Dan
[2]:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_SOPA_and_PIPA#Wikimedia_commu...
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
If things are as bad as that then there should be and might already be an offshore backup, possibly more than one, as it is a no-brainer, and I don’t think WMF tech management and the board are stupid, and nor are those who would wish to prevent it from happening. But plausible deniability. Cheers, Peter
-----Original Message----- From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Christophe Henner Sent: 30 September 2020 23:07 To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moving the technical infrastructure out of the US
Hi everyone,
Options to mitigate any risks are numerous, especially when it comes to content distribution (private/semi-private/public/delegated/federated/a mix of everything) but given the current context I would restrain from having this as a public / community discussion.
We, community members, would most probably have great inputs but when one is dealing with this kind of topic, designing contingencies plan, one has to be ful of what information can be public. I have no idea whether staff is working on such a topic, and it is better that way.
But we, as community members and awesome human beings, must be mindful of some things:
- The people in charge of that topic are mostly US Citizens. The current political and social climate is most probably draining their energy. Imagine having to manage it both from a personal and professional standpoint. Top that doing it for something as important as our projects. We cannot fathom their anxiety levels and should not add any to it. - Sending email about this topic, they have to read it. They most probably have to discuss, debate and balance whether they should answer or not. Imagine adding that to the first point. - They know for a fact, remember a lot of community members are staff, that community could be helping. But they can't ask for it. - Top all of that with them knowing that whatever course of action they might pick, it comes with a toll. Whether it is to talk about it here, and perhaps hinder their efforts, or not talk about it here and be perceived as ignoring the community. - Top all of that with the stress of trying to do their job in a global pandemic situation that might have them with loved ones at risk. Or with the need to care daily for young / elderly people. - Top that with the fact that they most probably all have relatives that at best are in financial struggle, or health struggles or are managing with the loss of loved ones.
Take a pause. Try to step in that space. Imagine how you would feel. Multiply that by a hundred.
I would recommend we (community members) restrain from talking about it. Perhaps what could be helpful, I am saying could, is for the people that do actually have knowledge on those topics to just say they are available to help if needs be with your area of expertise.
If no one at the Foundation acknowledges this thread or your emails, it is ok. It doesn't mean you are not valued, it means that you are being spared from that weight. We can provide support, but we should be mindful not to increase their current level of stress.
Please all take care of yourselves, loved ones and each other
PS: I said staff, but read it as "anyone with an official Wikimedia Foundation capacity". I know for a fact how those situations can be hard to manage when you are a volunteer board member in the shadow too.
-- Christophe
On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 21:32, Steven Walling steven.walling@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 12:22 PM Nathan nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
Well, to Steven's point that you might need a jurisdiction where
corporate
officers and employees aren't subject to extradition... I believe Germany does in fact have an extradition treaty with the United States.
The chapters do seem like the obvious potentially viable easy solution here, if WMF set up that contingency plan.
For instance, if WMDE did take over in an emergency, then the critical difference is that Germany doesn't extradite its own citizens to the US. So there'd just have to be a complete handoff of primary hosting to outside the US and some kind of agreement for WMDE (or pick your chapter) to take over operational control. There's probably a lot that real lawyers, of which I am not one, would know better here.
So far the criteria I'm hearing from the comments here:
- Politically stable
- Liberal political environment
- Strong protections against government interference in relevant
operations 4) Section 230-like protection against liability for user content 5) No natural disasters like fires, floods, hurricanes, volcanoes, etc. 6) Strong technological sophistication - preferably a robust technology industry that can supply local talent for WMF needs 7) Protections in the law for data privacy 8) Availability of renewable energy sources and other resources that
allow
for operation of the WMF with a low climate impact 9) Tax exemption or beneficial tax structure for receiving international fundings by donation 10) Clear and reliable regulatory framework for a charitable organization 11) Safe - low crime, low-risk of violence for WMF stakeholders and community 12) Free from risk of extradition to the U.S. or other jurisdictions
where
criminal or civil law might be used against WMF officers or employees
I would guess the list of countries that meet all of these criteria might be short. Norway might hit most of these except the last.
The only item that seems more or less impossible is preventing 5 in light of the impacts of climate change. There is no locale on the planet that won't suffer from severe weather and natural disasters, just some (like the poorer countries and anywhere in the tropics) that will see worse impacts. So the only nuance is aiming for more like "Prepared for the event of severe weather and natural disasters" not "none".
On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 2:44 PM Michael Peel email@mikepeel.net wrote:
… hence the existence of Wikimedia chapters? I suspect at least WMDE
could
take this on if it becomes necessary, although other chapters aren’t as technologically developed as I’d have liked to have seen.
Thanks, Mike
On 30 Sep 2020, at 19:35, Steven Walling steven.walling@gmail.com
wrote:
SJ hinted at a related problem which is that we'd also need a backup organizational structure to run things operationally and legally. If
the
US
becomes so politically unstable that hosting Wikimedia data is under
threat
there, just moving the data would not be enough. You'd also have to
include
a contingency plan that foresaw the need to legally operate the
Foundation
(or an equivalent organization anyway) under a different jurisdiction with corporate officers not subject to US law or extradition. If the servers are hosted in the EU but the legally controlling body and its employees are within the US, you could still see them legally forced
to
comply with an order, just like companies are forced to do so in other countries with censorious regimes today.
On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 8:59 AM Samuel Klein meta.sj@gmail.com
wrote:
We should have technical partners in multiple other jurisdictions
that
could help in a crisis, and load bearing infrastructure in at least
one
of
them, and a plan for how and when to switch. (The walkthrough of
what
would
be needed for a smooth transfer send most important, and useful for
general
reliability planning)
We should also fully support and realize Wikimedia-on-ipfs, similar
to
what
the internet archive had been doing. (Santhosh has some excellent
ideas
there)
🌍🌏🌎🌑
On Wed., Sep. 30, 2020, 5:35 a.m. Dan Garry (Deskana), <
djgwiki@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 09:49, Erik Moeller eloquence@gmail.com
wrote:
> I hope that some preliminary contingency plans exist or are being > developed, and I'm sure that the movement-wide debate will widen
if
> the US continues its downward slide into authoritarianism. >
I agree with Erik. Even under the Obama administration, there were
threats
to the existence of the movement, such as SOPA [1] which lead to a
blackout
[2]. One can extrapolate from current events that these threats
could
well
get larger and more frequent, rather than smaller and less
frequent,
should
someone in the US Government decide to focus their attention on
attacking
Wikipedia and free knowledge. It would be prudent to create a
contingency
plan which includes an exploration of other options for a location
of
operation for the Wikimedia Foundation and/or its servers, with
their
advantages and disadvantages. I personally wouldn't necessarily
advocate
for making the plan public; that would be ideal, but I'd be
comforted
merely to know it exists.
On Tue, 29 Sep 2020 at 23:36, Joseph Seddon <
josephseddon@gmail.com>
wrote:
> I believe options are going to be explored for sustainability but
right
now > legally speaking the US is the best jurisdiction for hosting us
now
and
the > foreseeable future. >
I agree with this too. For now, the United States remains the best
place
for the organisation to operate out of, and a move should not be
actively
considered.
Dan
[2]:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_SOPA_and_PIPA#Wikimedia_commu...
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org