[Foundation-l] Wikipedia tracks user behaviour via third party companies #2

[John at Darkstar]

Are the developers lawyers? A developer claiming something has an
unwanted privacy issue is very different from making claims about
something being a legal issue on the behalf of Foundation. Simply don't
do it.
John

Brian skrev:
> Or by one of the WMF developers removing the web bug.
> 
> 2009/6/6 John at Darkstar <vacuum at jeb.no>
> 
>> You can make claims about what you yourself wants or believe, but do
>> *not* claim that your personal beliefs reflects legal issues for
>> Foundation. If Foundation needs to make claims about what is and whats
>> not a legal issue, then such claims should be made by Mike.
>>
>> John
>>
>> Brian skrev:
>>> I also have not seen a clear explanation of what those who would like to
>>> generate statistics using web bugs plan to do with that data. How do they
>>> plan to use the data, and why aren't the plethora of statistics now made
>>> officially available by the WMF not satisfactory?
>>>
>>> You have bypassed the correct procedure. The amount of time that it takes
>>> the WMF to accomplish goals can be frustrating. Getting them to make your
>>> goal their goal can be frustrating. But it all has to start with you
>>> presenting them with a coherent goal that takes all the constraints into
>>> account. Then you need to get WMF approval which often involves getting
>>> community approval.
>>>
>>> Let's be clear that the privacy policy is a legal issue for the WMF.
>>> Volunteer admins cannot take user privacy into their own hands, under
>> their
>>> own interpretation. That's just not how it works!
>>>
>>>
>>> 2009/6/6 Brian <Brian.Mingus at colorado.edu>
>>>
>>>> This is another e-mail on this subject that just strikes me as flawed.
>>>> These are not vague privacy fears - they are real privacy fears. I see a
>>>> fundamental failure by those involved in this controversy to understand
>> this
>>>> point.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Jun 6, 2009 at 1:31 AM, Tisza Gergő <gtisza at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Robert Rohde <rarohde at ...> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> You may not be aware, but the relaying of page view data to third
>>>>>> party analysis platforms has been tried on a number of occasions in
>>>>>> the past and consistently shutdown.  (I think this even includes cases
>>>>>> before the Privacy Policy was adopted.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> However, to my recollection there has never been a case that quite
>>>>>> mirrors yours since we are talking about a privately hosted server
>>>>>> administered by a highly trusted community member.
>>>>> The (WM-DE-owned) toolserver ran a statistics script called WikiCharts
>> for
>>>>> a few
>>>>> years, which worked with data relayed by Common.js from several
>>>>> wikipedias,
>>>>> including de and en. While that is not exactly the same situation (as
>> the
>>>>> WMF
>>>>> has access to the toolserver), I think it proves my point that passing
>> IP
>>>>> data
>>>>> to an (in the strict organizational sense) third-party server does not
>>>>> necessarily violate the privacy policy, neither letter nor spirit, as
>> long
>>>>> as
>>>>> that server remains within the larger WM community.
>>>>>
>>>>> It is important to understand that this is a much more general question
>>>>> than
>>>>> that of web statistics: any third-party service that interacts with the
>>>>> standard
>>>>> wiki user interface receives private data, whether it needs it or not,
>>>>> because
>>>>> the user interface (the HTML page) is "executed" in the user's browser,
>>>>> and the
>>>>> browser has to contact the third-party service, and it cannot hide its
>> IP
>>>>> in
>>>>> that process. For example, we considered setting up some sort of spell
>>>>> checking
>>>>> service for hu.wp. That is something that cannot be done well centrally
>> -
>>>>> there
>>>>> is too much difference between languages. And if you do it with a local
>>>>> server,
>>>>> it has to communicate with the user's browser, and could in theory log
>>>>> requests
>>>>> and correlate them with edits on the wiki, thus it has to conform with
>> the
>>>>> privacy guidelines. It would be a shame if all such uses would be
>> blindly
>>>>> forbidden because of vague privacy fears.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> foundation-l mailing list
>>>>> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>>>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> foundation-l mailing list
>>> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>