It's pretty remarkable that Italian Court is keeping in mind the real nature of Wikipedia as a sui generis collaborative project and not like a web site in a traditional sense. This new legal definition might influence other courts or laws. The most of law traditions in Latin America follow closely the Italian criteria.

If possible, I would like a copy of the final resolution. Will you publish it on Commons or WMIT web page?

Congratulations WMIT!

2013/6/26 Ilario Valdelli valdelli@gmail.com

The blog has been already posted in the Italian mailing list and I would say that this is an excellent result.

The justice in Italy is really slow in general, but in this case the timeline has been short and the result of the court of justice really good for the future.

The definition that the prosecutor is able to change the definition in Wikipedia and for this reason there is no sense to accuse Wikipedia or WMF, it's a good way to give an indication for the future.

Thank you

On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 11:53 PM, Michelle Paulson mpaulson@wikimedia.orgwrote:

...

Hi All,

I am very happy to announce a favorable decision we have recently

received

...

in an Italian defamation case brought against the Wikimedia Foundation by former Italian Minister of Defense and Berlusconi advisor, Mr. Cesare Previti.

You can read more about it in our latest blog post<

http://blog.wikimedia.org/2013/06/26/wikimedia-foundation-legal-victory-ital...

...

...

(available

in English and Italian).

Best,

Michelle

Michelle Paulson Legal Counsel Wikimedia Foundation 149 New Montgomery Street, 3rd Floor San Francisco, CA 94105 mpaulson@wikimedia.org 415.839.6885 ext. 6608 (Office) 415.882.0495 (Fax)

NOTICE: *This message might have confidential or legally privileged information in it. If you have received this message by accident, please delete it and let us know about the mistake. For legal reasons, I may

only

...

serve as an attorney for the Wikimedia Foundation. This means I may not give legal advice to or serve as a lawyer for community members, volunteers, or staff members in their personal capacity.* _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

-- Ilario Valdelli Wikimedia CH Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens Association pour l’avancement des connaissances libre Associazione per il sostegno alla conoscenza libera Switzerland - 8008 Zürich Tel: +41764821371 http://www.wikimedia.ch _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Hi Nemo,

While this case is not binding precedent (Italy follows civil law), it is a great case that other courts can look to in evaluating the liability of chapters or other volunteers (who are not involved in the creation of the content in question) sued for their alleged responsibility over content.

It is worth noting (as I did in the blog post), however, that every individual is legally responsible for his or her actions both online and off. For your own protection, you should exercise caution and avoid contributing any content to the Wikimedia projects that may result in criminal or civil liability under the laws of the United States or any country that may claim jurisdiction over you. For more information, please see our Terms of Use https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Terms_of_Useand Legal Policieshttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Legal_and_Community_Advocacy/Legal_Policies#Responsibility_for_Edits_and_Contributions .

Best,

Michelle

On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 12:45 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.comwrote:

Does this help chapters and other volunteers sued for their alleged (potential) responsibility over the content? Of course I'm thinking of the 20 millions € trial against Frieda on behalf of WMIT.

Nemo