I recently stumbled upon the mailing-list discussion of the Chinese Wikinews. When I found
the discussion, I couldn't believe what I was reading. Is this the Wikimedia
Foundation that believes in free projects creating free content, "free" as in
both "free beer" and "free speech"?
While neutrality (NPOV) is a central policy at Wikimedia (and probably its very best
policy!), the Wikimedia Foundation is not neutral about *everything*. There are some
things about which it takes a very clear stance, and one of those things is freedom.
When it came to the issue of audio file formats, for instance, Jimbo Wales made a very
clear and correct decision that only file formats that could legally be used in free
software would be allowed. Many tens of thousands of Wikimedia users would probably have
liked to have been allowed to upload MP3 files. If an open vote had been held, MP3 would
probably have been allowed. But no vote was held, because this is a fundamental Wikimedia
policy.
On a practical level, the decision may have been more about promoting Ogg Vorbis that
about real legal worries about MP3. But that is valid as well. Personally, I agree
completely with Jimbo's principled decision to disallow MP3. That is because
"free content" is a fundamental, non-negotiable policy of Wikimedia.
For details, see
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Sound#File_formats and
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2004-July/011514.html.
When it comes to the Chinese Wikinews, however, the Wikimedia Foundation has not stood up
(so far) for free content.
Here the problem is not "free beer" but "free speech." To dely or deny
setting up *any* Wikimedia project because of the fear or threat of censorship is
something that the Foundation should be ashamed of. This is not a "community"
issue, and to call it such is to misrepresent the problem. This is an issue about the
fundamental policies of Wikimedia.
Do we really believe in free speech? Or is the only policy Wikimedia really cares about
one of "free beer" (i.e. in the case of Ogg Vorbis, the legal technicalities of
open source software)? Open software is terribly important, but it is no more important
that providing an outlet for people to write free news stories in Chinese.
Far more than enough users have already requested the Chinese project. See
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikinews/Start_a_new_edition#Chinese.28zh.29. Some are
mainland Chinese, others are part of the Chinese diaspora numbering tens of millions,
people who have no worries about government censorship. All have been jointly denied, up
to now, a useful project, only because of fears of censorship.
Are those fears justified? Perhaps. But the more relevant question is: Even if the fears
are justified, does that allow Wikimedia to be untrue to its value of "free"
projects (which includes "freedom of speech")? Furthermore, because *some*
Chinese users fear censorship, should the project be delayed or denied to all?
This is also an issue of power. Yes, power. Do we believe in our own strength? Wikimedia
has become, quite unexpectedly, a very well-known, well-respected, and influential
organization all over the world. That means that even if the threats censorship are real,
and even if there is some censorship in the short term, there is every reason to believe
that such censorship will not stand for long. Just as blocking was lifted from the Chinese
Wikipedia, it will be lifted, eventually, from Wikinews. The Chinese government will not
be able, for long, to justify its opposition to Wikimedia projects. But we have to believe
in ourselves, and in the fundamental value of free speech.
To conclude (and I apologize for this being so long), Wikimedia today is a project that is
"free" as in free beer. But as long as Chinese Wikinews is delayed or denied,
Wikimedia is *not* free as in free speech.
The Wikimedia Foundation must take an absolutely clear, non-negotiable position that the
fear or threat of censorship will not be allowed to interfere with any existing or
proposed Wikimedia Project. "Free speech" is no less important that "free
beer."
Dovi Jacobs
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com