[Foundation-l] Texas Instruments signing key controversy

[Jussi-Ville Heiskanen]

Ray Saintonge wrote:
> Techman224 wrote:
>   
>> Unfortunately, the WMF got involved the moment when they removed the keys, also the DMCA notice (or any other notice)
>> is given to the person or organization that runs the website. It is not given to the user who posted the content as they can't
>> remove content after it has been published. Since the WMF got the notice, it is their responsibility to file a counternotice or not.
>>
>>   
>>     
> No. This is why such notices should be a matter of public record.  An 
> ISP who disagrees with a notice can simply leave the material there and 
> wait to be sued without waiting for a counter-notice. It has the right 
> to do so; this is far different from an obligation to do so as you seem 
> to be suggesting.
>
> Ec
>
>   

It should be noted that the Chilling Effects Clearinghouse - which
is the closest thing to a accessible public record of such notices - does
not appear to hold more than 3 (count them, three) notices that
deal with content on wikimedia sites. Notably it appears that none
of them appears to have been entered by the WMF - with the caveat
that perhaps the one involving German Wikipedia may have had some
chapter involvement, though likely not.

I would be interested to hear from some knowledgeable person in a
position of responsibility within the Foundation (perhaps Mike
Godwin), whether routine reporting of these kind of notices to
Chilling Effects Clearinghouse has been explored in any depth.


Yours,

Jussi-Ville Heiskanen


P.S. Pointedly not commenting at all about your understanding
of the level of obligation to comply with a notice, though mine
differs considerably from yours.