It isn't just a French issue, the whole of the European Union has Data Protection Law based on the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Protection_Directive
And the categories of "Sensitive" data are similar across the EU. Ethnicity, religion, health and Political opinion being perhaps the most relevant to us. I think that not all countries defined criminal record as Sensitive, and the UK apparently opted out of the philosophical opinions bit, but the legislation across Europe has commonalities, though it would be stretching a point to describe it as harmonised.
But the good thing is that it isn't as simple as a ban on processing such data, there are various exemptions, and I'm pretty sure they include if the individual has made that information publicly known. So French citizens are allowed to know what political party their President is a member of, and they can't be prosecuted simply for categorising the Pope as a Roman Catholic. However just because somebody's parents, siblings and children have self identified as Jewish doesn't mean that they also have disclosed that information about themselves.
Now that we have chapters in some of these countries it might be worth starting a dialogue with the various Information Commissioners (apologies if this is already happening). I would hope that our existing policies largely cover us here, provided that is that we editors living in the EU treat what they consider to be "sensitive" data about living people as contentious data. But there could be some grey areas, for example if no EU source is covering something then an EU editor sourcing a fact from a reliable source in the US might be in difficulty. Especially if that "fact" was something that EU sources weren't covering because they had no legal basis to do so.
I would hope that we could get some guidelines agreed between European chapter and their national Information Commissioners, and that those guidelines could then be communicated to editors; Both to reassure people as to where the boundaries are and so that we in Europe know to leave certain things to our colleagues outside the EU.
WSC
On 19 August 2012 13:23, Andreas Kolbe jayen466@gmail.com wrote:
As French Wikimedians are unlikely to see this thread here on wikien-l (and wikifr-l seems moribund), I've dropped a post about this to wikimedia-l.
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2012-August/121744.html _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 12:11 PM, WereSpielChequers < werespielchequers@gmail.com> wrote:
But there could be some grey areas, for example if no EU source is covering something then an EU editor sourcing a fact from a reliable source in the US might be in difficulty. Especially if that "fact" was something that EU sources weren't covering because they had no legal basis to do so.
WSC
That's a little Orwellian, isn't it. If a "fact" is known elsewhere, but not in your own country, you could be prosecuted for reporting it. So much for everyone not being entitled to their own facts. An example of the wisdom of not incorporating the WMF in the European Union, and something that should inject caution into efforts to more closely link the WMF and its finances to European chapters.
For something truly orwellian, read this: "The New Totalitarianism of Surveillance Technology" http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/298-185/12956-focus-the-new-totalita...
Regards, Rui
That's a little Orwellian, isn't it. If a "fact" is known elsewhere, but not in your own country, you could be prosecuted for reporting it. So much for everyone not being entitled to their own facts. An example of the wisdom of not incorporating the WMF in the European Union, and something that should inject caution into efforts to more closely link the WMF and its finances to European chapters. _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
WTF? What the link between WMF finances and the topic? And by the way are you talking about the movement finances or the foundation finances, because it's not the same thing.
Charles
___________________________________________________________ Charles ANDRES, Chairman "Wikimedia CH" – Association for the advancement of free knowledge – www.wikimedia.ch Skype: charles.andres.wmch IRC://irc.freenode.net/wikimedia-ch
Le 19 août 2012 à 18:30, Nathan nawrich@gmail.com a écrit :
That's a little Orwellian, isn't it. If a "fact" is known elsewhere, but not in your own country, you could be prosecuted for reporting it. So much for everyone not being entitled to their own facts. An example of the wisdom of not incorporating the WMF in the European Union, and something that should inject caution into efforts to more closely link the WMF and its finances to European chapters. _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
charles andrès, 08/20/2012 12:27 PM:
WTF? What the link between WMF finances and the topic? And by the way are you talking about the movement finances or the foundation finances, because it's not the same thing.
Besides, we're supposed to have higher privacy standards than, say, Google and I'm not aware of Google having to shut down their European branches. If Wikimedia projects were breaching EU laws they would just be doing it wrong, not the opposite; I doubt they are though.
Nemo
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org