[Wikimedia-l] is wikipedia zero illegal because it violates net neutrality?

Tue Aug 27 23:03:37 UTC 2013

On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 9:17 PM, George Herbert <george.herbert at gmail.com>wrote:

> Andreas:
>
> > The most obvious benefits of the arrangement to the Wikimedia Foundation
> > are increased page views, an enhanced Alexa ranking, enhanced worldwide
> > brand name recognition, and an even more dominant role in the global
> > information market place.
>
>
> Is this not our organizaitonal goal being fulfilled?

Well, you asked, below: [1]

---o0o---

And to the extent there are such, are we associated with this provider in
some way that causes us to be their service in some preferred way to their
or our benefit?  What benefit do we get?

---o0o---

I was answering your question.

Andreas

[1] http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2013-August/127746.html

>
>
> On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 6:31 AM, Andreas Kolbe <jayen466 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I guess the benefit to the Wikipedia Zero providers is that making
> > Wikipedia available for free to their subscribers is a competitive
> > advantage for them. That seems obvious enough, and it is acknowledged in
> > the Wikimedia Foundation FAQ,
> > http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Mobile_partnerships:
> >
> > ---o0o---
> >
> > *Q: Will these operators be putting Wikipedia in their advertising?*
> >
> > A: Many of them will put out various communication materials (ranging
> from
> > leaflets to billboards) about the program in order to promote it and
> > encourage usage. Anytime the Wikipedia logo is used, the Wikimedia
> > Foundation will have to give approval to ensure that the use is in line
> > with the mission.
> >
> > ---o0o---
> >
> >
> > The 2009 deal with Orange (which I believe ran for three years) did
> involve
> > advertising being placed on Wikipedia content, with part of the
> advertising
> > revenue paid to the Wikimedia Foundation:
> >
> >
> >
> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Press_releases/Orange_and_Wikimedia_announce_partnership_April_2009QA
> >
> > I haven't seen any figures released on how much Orange paid the
> Foundation
> > as part of the advertising deal.
> >
> > At any rate, the new deal with Orange no longer includes that financial
> > arrangement, according to the Mobile partnerships FAQ. See
> > http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Mobile_partnerships:
> >
> > ---o0o---
> >
> > *Q: Is there money involved?*
> >
> > A: No. There is no money involved with this partnership. Orange is not
> > paying Wikimedia Foundation, and Wikimedia Foundation is not paying
> Orange.
> >
> > ---o0o---
> >
> >
> > I don't know whether Zero providers are allowed to place ads on the
> > content, and if so, whether that gets them additional revenue.
> >
> > The most obvious benefits of the arrangement to the Wikimedia Foundation
> > are increased page views, an enhanced Alexa ranking, enhanced worldwide
> > brand name recognition, and an even more dominant role in the global
> > information market place.
> >
> > Andreas
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 6:52 PM, George William Herbert <
> > george.herbert at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Aug 26, 2013, at 10:42 AM, JP Béland <lebo.beland at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > 2013/8/26, Martijn Hoekstra <martijnhoekstra at gmail.com>:
> > > >> On Aug 26, 2013 6:30 PM, "JP Béland" <lebo.beland at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> "And if it is illegal or borderline according to, say,
> > > >>> netherlands, swiss, or german law, is it appropriate to do it in
> > > >>> countries where the law is less developed? "
> > > >>>
> > > >>> As said Kevin, it is impossible to respect the law of all countries
> > in
> > > >>> every country (Wikipedia already fails at that in its current state
> > by
> > > >>> the way, with or without Wikipedia Zero). So no we cannot "just
> > > >>> abstain from any
> > > >>> activity which might be perceived as illegal somewhere". After
> that,
> > > >>> are you suggesting we should apply the laws of some "developed"
> > > >>> countries to all countries and just ignore the others, this is way
> > > >>> more morally wrong in my opinion.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> That being said, the law on net neutrality you cited applies to
> ISP,
> > > >>> which Wikipedia Zero or the WMF isn't, so it doesn't apply to it.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> But of course, we as a community and the WMF should still keep high
> > > >>> ethical and moral standards.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> JP Beland
> > > >>> aka Amqui
> > > >>
> > > >> I do think there is some merit in the net neutrality argument, at
> > least
> > > >> sufficiently so to be open to discussion on whether or not offering
> > > >> Wikipedia Zero is a good thing. It comes down to the question if we
> > > believe
> > > >> that having a walled garden variety of internet consisting only of
> > > >> Wikipedia for free, and with that undermining the market position
> for
> > a
> > > >> paid, open internet is a net positive. I'm inclined to say it is,
> but
> > > the
> > > >> opposite position, though counter-intuitive, is pretty defensible.
> > > >>
> > > >> -Martijn
> > > >
> > > > "Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share
> in
> > > > the sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment."
> > > > (http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Vision)
> > > >
> > > > I agree with you that it is good to discuss about it. The real
> > > > question we have to ask is what between Wikipedia Zero giving free
> > > > access to Wikipedia or avoiding that for net neutrality and not
> > > > undermining the market position for a paid open internet is getting
> us
> > > > closer to our vision.
> > > >
> > > > JP Béland
> > > > aka Amqui
> > >
> > >
> > > I believe a nonstandard interpretation of net neutrality is being used
> > > here.
> > >
> > > It's intended - as originally posed - to prevent a service provider
> from
> > > advantaging their own bundled services and disadvantage independent
> > > services via tariff structure.
> > >
> > > What competitors for Wikipedia exist?
> > >
> > > And to the extent there are such, are we associated with this provider
> in
> > > some way that causes us to be their service in some preferred way to
> > their
> > > or our benefit?  What benefit do we get?
> > >
> > >
> > > Sent from Kangphone
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list
> > > Wikimedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request at lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list
> > Wikimedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request at lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> -george william herbert
> george.herbert at gmail.com
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request at lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>