Here is an interesting quote of a Mozilla Foundation lawyer from https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/05/11/mozilla_wants_eu_to_slow_down_its_e...
"draft Regulation imposes very specific restrictions on the technology industry that may challenge the business models of some ISPs. In some areas, obligations are proscriptive, undermining the principle of technological neutrality that this legislation needs to withstand the test of time in a rapidly changing environment"
Is it appropriate for the Wikimedia Foundation to respond to this sort of thing? Mozilla is almost entirely funded by ad-supported businesses at present.
James,
Could you articulate how, in your view, the implementation of the proposed directive, or otherwise, would affect the Wikimedia Foundation's mission of "encouraging the growth, development and distribution of free, multilingual, educational content, and to providing the full content of these wiki-based projects to the public free of charge," please? Because if you can't, then the answer to your question has to be "No, it isn't".
"Rogol"
On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 4:02 PM, James Salsman jsalsman@gmail.com wrote:
Here is an interesting quote of a Mozilla Foundation lawyer from https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/05/11/mozilla_wants_eu_ to_slow_down_its_eprivacy_directive_process/
"draft Regulation imposes very specific restrictions on the technology industry that may challenge the business models of some ISPs. In some areas, obligations are proscriptive, undermining the principle of technological neutrality that this legislation needs to withstand the test of time in a rapidly changing environment"
Is it appropriate for the Wikimedia Foundation to respond to this sort of thing? Mozilla is almost entirely funded by ad-supported businesses at present.
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
Rogol,
First, it's very well established that privacy is essential to not just the creation of educational content by Foundation volunteers, but to the ability of readers to have unfettered access to that content. I am sure you are aware that the Foundation has been pursuing a lawsuit for years against the U.S. government to protect readers privacy: https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/field_document/23._aclu_appeal_brie...
The European Commission is seeking the power to fine ISPs for breaches to their users' privacy, which would certainly strengthen the Foundation's projects' readers ability to access information without threat of eavesdropping by commercial interests, such as having their searches for medical conditions made available for sale to insurance and marketing companies. If you have any reason to believe otherwise, please say so.
Secondly, where did you find that mission statement you quoted? It is not the one at https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Mission_statement
On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 12:02 AM, Rogol Domedonfors domedonfors@gmail.com wrote:
James,
Could you articulate how, in your view, the implementation of the proposed directive, or otherwise, would affect the Wikimedia Foundation's mission of "encouraging the growth, development and distribution of free, multilingual, educational content, and to providing the full content of these wiki-based projects to the public free of charge," please? Because if you can't, then the answer to your question has to be "No, it isn't".
"Rogol"
On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 4:02 PM, James Salsman jsalsman@gmail.com wrote:
Here is an interesting quote of a Mozilla Foundation lawyer from https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/05/11/mozilla_wants_eu_ to_slow_down_its_eprivacy_directive_process/
"draft Regulation imposes very specific restrictions on the technology industry that may challenge the business models of some ISPs. In some areas, obligations are proscriptive, undermining the principle of technological neutrality that this legislation needs to withstand the test of time in a rapidly changing environment"
Is it appropriate for the Wikimedia Foundation to respond to this sort of thing? Mozilla is almost entirely funded by ad-supported businesses at present.
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
James
To take your points in reverse order: I was quoting from the big box on the front page at https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Home
As to the first point, I think it is rather for those asserting that some particular point falls within the Foundation's mission to make their case that it would be a justifiable use of the donations that were given for the furtherance of that mission. It is not clear that improving the "readers ability to access information without threat of eavesdropping by commercial interests" is a primary component of a mission "to empower and engage people around the world to collect and develop educational content under a free license https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/en:free_content or in the public domain, and to disseminate it effectively and globally" if that is the formulation you prefer. They may be cognate, but they are not the same.
Since it is so well established, in your opinion, that "privacy is essential to [...] the creation of educational content by Foundation volunteers", perhaps you would be so kind as to point to the place where that irrefutable argument is made public? Particularly since many volunteers clearly do not feel inhibited about contributing under their own names. Privacy may indeed be essential to "unfettered" access, but "free" and "unfettered" are not quite synonymous.
"Rogol"
On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 7:58 PM, James Salsman jsalsman@gmail.com wrote:
Rogol,
First, it's very well established that privacy is essential to not just the creation of educational content by Foundation volunteers, but to the ability of readers to have unfettered access to that content. I am sure you are aware that the Foundation has been pursuing a lawsuit for years against the U.S. government to protect readers privacy: https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/field_document/ 23._aclu_appeal_brief_2.17.2016.pdf
The European Commission is seeking the power to fine ISPs for breaches to their users' privacy, which would certainly strengthen the Foundation's projects' readers ability to access information without threat of eavesdropping by commercial interests, such as having their searches for medical conditions made available for sale to insurance and marketing companies. If you have any reason to believe otherwise, please say so.
Secondly, where did you find that mission statement you quoted? It is not the one at https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Mission_statement
On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 12:02 AM, Rogol Domedonfors domedonfors@gmail.com wrote:
James,
Could you articulate how, in your view, the implementation of the
proposed
directive, or otherwise, would affect the Wikimedia Foundation's mission
of
"encouraging the growth, development and distribution of free, multilingual, educational content, and to providing the full content of these wiki-based projects to the public free of charge," please? Because if you can't, then the answer to your question has to be "No, it isn't".
"Rogol"
On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 4:02 PM, James Salsman jsalsman@gmail.com
wrote:
Here is an interesting quote of a Mozilla Foundation lawyer from https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/05/11/mozilla_wants_eu_ to_slow_down_its_eprivacy_directive_process/
"draft Regulation imposes very specific restrictions on the technology industry that may challenge the business models of some ISPs. In some areas, obligations are proscriptive, undermining the principle of technological neutrality that this legislation needs to withstand the test of time in a rapidly changing environment"
Is it appropriate for the Wikimedia Foundation to respond to this sort of thing? Mozilla is almost entirely funded by ad-supported businesses at present.
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