I see I am not the only one who noticed what WMF Legal is doing, but I see it a different way than Nathan. I see it as the WMF intimidating and threatening those EU individuals who dare to to exercise their rights under the court's ruling. Brigham and Paulson are basically saying "just try it. We will Streisand you."
Trillium Corsage
06.08.2014, 16:11, "Nathan" <email clipped>:
Thanks very much for this, Stephen and the legal team. I especially appreciate that the WMF has decided to make public the specific notifications of the use of the "Right to be forgotten" in the EU.[1] It's interesting that the bulk of the suppression requests have come from a single (ex?) Wikimedian targeting internal process pages of his home wiki. Not shockingly, the RtF request is now in the top 5 results on a Google search of that persons name.
The NY Times covered the transparency report: http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/08/06/wikipedia-details-government-data-r...
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 6:15 AM, Stephen LaPorte <email clipped> wrote:
Hi All,
The “right to be forgotten” has been the subject of much discussion and debate (including on this list),[1] particularly following the May European Court of Justice judgment ordering Google to delist some links related to a Spanish citizen.[2] Since then, search engines have been receiving requests to remove hundreds of thousands of URLs from search results. Google recently released more information about its right to be forgotten requests.[3]
The WMF legal team has been watching the “right to be forgotten” issue closely and considering what legal strategies we should take going forward. Today, the WMF published its first transparency report[4]—you can read more in this blog post.[5] WMF held a press briefing announcing our strategy of advocacy and transparency on link censorship. We will oppose what we see as a misguided court decision that has resulted in a crude implementation of the “right to be forgotten.” Lila has also issued a statement,[6] and, Geoff, WMF’s general counsel, and Michelle Paulson, WMF's legal counsel, have published a blog on the subject.[7] As the topic is of interest to this group, we wanted to keep you informed of these recent legal developments.
Thanks, Stephen
[1] http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/advocacy_advisors/2014-June/000547.html,
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/advocacy_advisors/2014-June/000539.html [2] http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:62012CJ0131 [3] https://docs.google.com/a/wikimedia.org/file/d/0B8syaai6SSfiT0EwRUFyOENqR3M/... [4] http://transparency.wikimedia.org/ [5] https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/08/06/wikimedia-foundation-releases-first-tr... [6] https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/08/06/european-court-decision-punches-holes-... [7] https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/08/06/wikipedia-pages-censored-in-european-s...
-- Stephen LaPorte Legal Counsel Wikimedia Foundation
*NOTICE: As an attorney for the Wikimedia Foundation, for legal and ethical reasons, I cannot give legal advice to, or serve as a lawyer for, community members, volunteers, or staff members in their personal capacity. For more on what this means, please see our legal disclaimer https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Legal_Disclaimer.*
_______________________________________________ Advocacy_Advisors mailing list Advocacy_Advisors@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe