Hello,
I am writing to ask if there are any plans to render the English Wikipedia compliant with French privacy laws. Currently, if a French high school student goes to a French library, reserves a computer, and types "List of French Jews" into Google, Duckduckgo, or Dogpile, an adhoc en.wikipedia list of over 850 people (approximately half of them living) appears in the #2 position (Category: French Jews). In the first position is the English Wikipedia page "List of French Jews" containing the following text, originally added in 2010, showing that the en.wikipedia community is aware that they are breaking French law:
"The French nationality law itself, strongly secular, forbids any statistics or lists based on ethnic or religious membership."
A French person tagging biographies of living people in en.wp with the category "French Jews" is a violation of French privacy law which would expose the Wikipedian to a penalty of €300,000 and/or 5 years imprisonment:
"Le fait, hors les cas prévus par la loi, de mettre ou de conserver en mémoire informatisée, sans le consentement exprès de l’intéressé, des données à caractère personnel qui, directement ou indirectement, font apparaître les origines raciales ou ethniques, les opinions politiques, philosophiques ou religieuses, ou les appartenances syndicales des personnes, ou qui sont relatives à la santé ou à l’orientation ou à l'identité sexuelle de celles-ci, est puni de cinq ans d’emprisonnement et de 300 000 € d’amende." (source: https://www.cnil.fr/fr/les-sanctions-penales )
There is, to the best of my knowledge, no such category on fr.wp, as people in France are well aware of the law.
See also "List of West European Jews" / Category: French People of Jewish descent / Category: French People of Arab descent / Category: French Freemasons (167), Category: French Atheists (93 including a recent president), etc.
I noticed in researching the question that the Category "French rapists" (2 BLP) is associated with the hidden category "No indexed", whereas the category "French Jews" (100s of BLP) is associated with the hidden category: "categories requiring diffusion". As a temporary measure (to avoid actively feeding this info into search engines), perhaps categories related to racial/ethnic origins, religious & philosophical opinions could be tagged "No indexed" rather than "requiring diffusion"?
The WMF hosts their servers in the US, the Netherlands and will soon also be hosting off-shore in Singapore, which probably leads WMF legal to believe that this grants them immunity from French privacy laws. Nevertheless, I thought I would mention that this is a potentially significant problem going forward. Discussion leading to action correcting this potential avenue of abuse might help the WMF to avoid litigation, given that the current policies on English Wikipedia actively facilitate violation of French laws.
(data from petscan.wmflabs.org): French Christians (21 members), French Hindus (17 members), French Buddhists (9 members), French Muslims (0 members), French Jews (862 members).
Thank you for your time considering how best to address this problem.
sashi
We should no more follow French censorship laws than we should follow Turkish ones. All editors are responsible for compliance with the laws in their jurisdiction.
Todd
On Fri, May 25, 2018, 12:53 PM sashi learning@creoliste.fr wrote:
Hello,
I am writing to ask if there are any plans to render the English Wikipedia compliant with French privacy laws. Currently, if a French high school student goes to a French library, reserves a computer, and types "List of French Jews" into Google, Duckduckgo, or Dogpile, an adhoc en.wikipedia list of over 850 people (approximately half of them living) appears in the #2 position (Category: French Jews). In the first position is the English Wikipedia page "List of French Jews" containing the following text, originally added in 2010, showing that the en.wikipedia community is aware that they are breaking French law:
"The French nationality law itself, strongly secular, forbids any statistics or lists based on ethnic or religious membership."
A French person tagging biographies of living people in en.wp with the category "French Jews" is a violation of French privacy law which would expose the Wikipedian to a penalty of €300,000 and/or 5 years imprisonment:
"Le fait, hors les cas prévus par la loi, de mettre ou de conserver en mémoire informatisée, sans le consentement exprès de l’intéressé, des données à caractère personnel qui, directement ou indirectement, font apparaître les origines raciales ou ethniques, les opinions politiques, philosophiques ou religieuses, ou les appartenances syndicales des personnes, ou qui sont relatives à la santé ou à l’orientation ou à l'identité sexuelle de celles-ci, est puni de cinq ans d’emprisonnement et de 300 000 € d’amende." (source: https://www.cnil.fr/fr/les-sanctions-penales )
There is, to the best of my knowledge, no such category on fr.wp, as people in France are well aware of the law.
See also "List of West European Jews" / Category: French People of Jewish descent / Category: French People of Arab descent / Category: French Freemasons (167), Category: French Atheists (93 including a recent president), etc.
I noticed in researching the question that the Category "French rapists" (2 BLP) is associated with the hidden category "No indexed", whereas the category "French Jews" (100s of BLP) is associated with the hidden category: "categories requiring diffusion". As a temporary measure (to avoid actively feeding this info into search engines), perhaps categories related to racial/ethnic origins, religious & philosophical opinions could be tagged "No indexed" rather than "requiring diffusion"?
The WMF hosts their servers in the US, the Netherlands and will soon also be hosting off-shore in Singapore, which probably leads WMF legal to believe that this grants them immunity from French privacy laws. Nevertheless, I thought I would mention that this is a potentially significant problem going forward. Discussion leading to action correcting this potential avenue of abuse might help the WMF to avoid litigation, given that the current policies on English Wikipedia actively facilitate violation of French laws.
(data from petscan.wmflabs.org): French Christians (21 members), French Hindus (17 members), French Buddhists (9 members), French Muslims (0 members), French Jews (862 members).
Thank you for your time considering how best to address this problem.
sashi
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
Whereas I absolutely agree with Todd, let me note that in the list many entries are unsourced or poorly sourced and can not be there according to the policies.
Cheers Yaroslav
On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 8:55 PM, Todd Allen toddmallen@gmail.com wrote:
We should no more follow French censorship laws than we should follow Turkish ones. All editors are responsible for compliance with the laws in their jurisdiction.
Todd
On Fri, May 25, 2018, 12:53 PM sashi learning@creoliste.fr wrote:
Hello,
I am writing to ask if there are any plans to render the English Wikipedia compliant with French privacy laws. Currently, if a French high school student goes to a French library, reserves a computer, and types "List of French Jews" into Google, Duckduckgo, or Dogpile, an adhoc en.wikipedia list of over 850 people (approximately half of them living) appears in the #2 position (Category: French Jews). In the first position is the English Wikipedia page "List of French Jews" containing the following text, originally added in 2010, showing that the en.wikipedia community is aware that they are breaking French law:
"The French nationality law itself, strongly secular, forbids any statistics or lists based on ethnic or religious membership."
A French person tagging biographies of living people in en.wp with the category "French Jews" is a violation of French privacy law which would expose the Wikipedian to a penalty of €300,000 and/or 5 years
imprisonment:
"Le fait, hors les cas prévus par la loi, de mettre ou de conserver en mémoire informatisée, sans le consentement exprès de l’intéressé, des données à caractère personnel qui, directement ou indirectement, font apparaître les origines raciales ou ethniques, les opinions politiques, philosophiques ou religieuses, ou les appartenances syndicales des personnes, ou qui sont relatives à la santé ou à l’orientation ou à l'identité sexuelle de celles-ci, est puni de cinq ans d’emprisonnement et de 300 000 € d’amende." (source: https://www.cnil.fr/fr/les-sanctions-penales )
There is, to the best of my knowledge, no such category on fr.wp, as people in France are well aware of the law.
See also "List of West European Jews" / Category: French People of Jewish descent / Category: French People of Arab descent / Category: French Freemasons (167), Category: French Atheists (93 including a recent president), etc.
I noticed in researching the question that the Category "French rapists" (2 BLP) is associated with the hidden category "No indexed", whereas the category "French Jews" (100s of BLP) is associated with the hidden category: "categories requiring diffusion". As a temporary measure (to avoid actively feeding this info into search engines), perhaps categories related to racial/ethnic origins, religious & philosophical opinions could be tagged "No indexed" rather than "requiring diffusion"?
The WMF hosts their servers in the US, the Netherlands and will soon also be hosting off-shore in Singapore, which probably leads WMF legal to believe that this grants them immunity from French privacy laws. Nevertheless, I thought I would mention that this is a potentially significant problem going forward. Discussion leading to action correcting this potential avenue of abuse might help the WMF to avoid litigation, given that the current policies on English Wikipedia actively facilitate violation of French laws.
(data from petscan.wmflabs.org): French Christians (21 members), French Hindus (17 members), French Buddhists (9 members), French Muslims (0 members), French Jews (862 members).
Thank you for your time considering how best to address this problem.
sashi
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
Todd is correct, en.wiki and the WMF operate out of the US and are not subject to other nation’s laws regarding content for the most part. Also, all entries should be blue-linked, else they must be in compliance with LISTN and V. For the rest, a inline citation is not required. Lexi
On May 25, 2018, at 3:21 PM, Yaroslav Blanter ymbalt@gmail.com wrote:
Whereas I absolutely agree with Todd, let me note that in the list many entries are unsourced or poorly sourced and can not be there according to the policies.
Cheers Yaroslav
On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 8:55 PM, Todd Allen toddmallen@gmail.com wrote:
We should no more follow French censorship laws than we should follow Turkish ones. All editors are responsible for compliance with the laws in their jurisdiction.
Todd
On Fri, May 25, 2018, 12:53 PM sashi learning@creoliste.fr wrote:
Hello,
I am writing to ask if there are any plans to render the English Wikipedia compliant with French privacy laws. Currently, if a French high school student goes to a French library, reserves a computer, and types "List of French Jews" into Google, Duckduckgo, or Dogpile, an adhoc en.wikipedia list of over 850 people (approximately half of them living) appears in the #2 position (Category: French Jews). In the first position is the English Wikipedia page "List of French Jews" containing the following text, originally added in 2010, showing that the en.wikipedia community is aware that they are breaking French law:
"The French nationality law itself, strongly secular, forbids any statistics or lists based on ethnic or religious membership."
A French person tagging biographies of living people in en.wp with the category "French Jews" is a violation of French privacy law which would expose the Wikipedian to a penalty of €300,000 and/or 5 years
imprisonment:
"Le fait, hors les cas prévus par la loi, de mettre ou de conserver en mémoire informatisée, sans le consentement exprès de l’intéressé, des données à caractère personnel qui, directement ou indirectement, font apparaître les origines raciales ou ethniques, les opinions politiques, philosophiques ou religieuses, ou les appartenances syndicales des personnes, ou qui sont relatives à la santé ou à l’orientation ou à l'identité sexuelle de celles-ci, est puni de cinq ans d’emprisonnement et de 300 000 € d’amende." (source: https://www.cnil.fr/fr/les-sanctions-penales )
There is, to the best of my knowledge, no such category on fr.wp, as people in France are well aware of the law.
See also "List of West European Jews" / Category: French People of Jewish descent / Category: French People of Arab descent / Category: French Freemasons (167), Category: French Atheists (93 including a recent president), etc.
I noticed in researching the question that the Category "French rapists" (2 BLP) is associated with the hidden category "No indexed", whereas the category "French Jews" (100s of BLP) is associated with the hidden category: "categories requiring diffusion". As a temporary measure (to avoid actively feeding this info into search engines), perhaps categories related to racial/ethnic origins, religious & philosophical opinions could be tagged "No indexed" rather than "requiring diffusion"?
The WMF hosts their servers in the US, the Netherlands and will soon also be hosting off-shore in Singapore, which probably leads WMF legal to believe that this grants them immunity from French privacy laws. Nevertheless, I thought I would mention that this is a potentially significant problem going forward. Discussion leading to action correcting this potential avenue of abuse might help the WMF to avoid litigation, given that the current policies on English Wikipedia actively facilitate violation of French laws.
(data from petscan.wmflabs.org): French Christians (21 members), French Hindus (17 members), French Buddhists (9 members), French Muslims (0 members), French Jews (862 members).
Thank you for your time considering how best to address this problem.
sashi
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
I'm not seeing an argument here for why Wikimedia should adhere to this law, if it is correctly stated by the OP. If France passed a law banning Internet-published photos of living people, how would we approach that law? If Germany barred publishing the place of birth, date of birth or religious preference of public figures? If the United States banned publishing the name of individuals accused of mass murder? Passionate arguments could be made in favor of each, but none of them would support the perspective of an educational organization dedicated to the freedom of knowledge.
Nathan, the Enwiki organic category system is not very good. For example, there are no consistent ontological constraints placed on the entire ontological tree (which should not be surprising because the Library of Congress Card Number system, the Dewey decimal system, the SIC ontology, and even Wordnet to some extent, are all insufficient for topic subject matter classification as specializations increase.) As ontologies go, it barely ranks in the fourth decile. Wikidata already has inherent ontology patches to the organic category system, and most if not all of them are compliant with European laws. I am going to love what happens to Wikipedia's organic categories as they meet normal forms.
Enjoy!
Best regards, Jim
On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 6:24 PM, Nathan nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
I'm not seeing an argument here for why Wikimedia should adhere to this law, if it is correctly stated by the OP. If France passed a law banning Internet-published photos of living people, how would we approach that law? If Germany barred publishing the place of birth, date of birth or religious preference of public figures? If the United States banned publishing the name of individuals accused of mass murder? Passionate arguments could be made in favor of each, but none of them would support the perspective of an educational organization dedicated to the freedom of knowledge. _______________________________________________ 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