Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] WMF complying to court orders.

[Asaf Bartov]

On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 9:57 AM Anirudh S. Bhati 
wrote:

> I do not think there is anything irresponsible about having an open and
> frank discussion about the issue based on the information that is available
> in the public domain.
>

Certainly, and you should discuss it all you like.  I did not say "having
an open and frank discussion" would be irresponsible; as you no doubt
noticed, I used the word 'irresponsible' about the prospect of me offering
an opinion on the matter.  I am not sufficiently informed on this matter to
have an opinion worth expressing.

I can only repeat my recommendation: if you are not satisfied with the
information available in that blog post, write to le...@wikimedia.org and
express your concerns, specifically.  Legal is unlikely to participate in
discussion on this mailing list.

   A.
-- 
Asaf Bartov
Wikimedia Foundation 

Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality!
https://donate.wikimedia.org
___
Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l

Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] WMF complying to court orders.

[Anirudh S. Bhati]

The WMF's legal team has already provided its opinion in the post published
on their blog (linked above in Sudhanwa's email).  The post admits that the
oversight action was unusual, and a departure from the ordinary norms that
would usually apply.

I do not think there is anything irresponsible about having an open and
frank discussion about the issue based on the information that is available
in the public domain.

On Tue, May 7, 2019 at 7:18 PM Asaf Bartov  wrote:

> Since you are disappointed at staff silence on this list, I will clarify:
> I have no more insight into the legal issue, and the considerations that
> made the WMF Legal team comply with the German court order, than you do.
> Nor am I a lawyer.  For me to offer any opinion on the matter would be
> irresponsible.  The Legal team at WMF *is* in a position to address your
> concern, and can be reached at le...@wikimedia.org.  As far as I know,
> none of them reads this mailing list.
>
> A.
>
> On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 9:42 PM Sudhanwa Jogalekar 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> My point was not about the content or context of the court order but the
>> compliance of it by WMF.
>> For all these years, we have been told that WMF does not do anything on
>> the content on wikipedia. And here is a case where even the history is also
>> removed that too within a day to comply with a German court order which is
>> obviously out of jurisdiction of any US laws under which WMF is required to
>> be complaint.
>>
>> From the points mentioned by Anirudh, it is also clear that WMF probably
>> does some(may be considerably more)  discrimination depending on the
>> context. As such, it seems there is a bias within WMF and also on the
>> content of WMF projects.
>>
>> For me, it is very much important that the Indian map issue IS a legal
>> matter and WMF does not address it properly. This issue is being
>> highlighted from the Wikiconference in Mumbai and it still continues.
>> Almost all my time after leaving from Pune till I came back from the
>> conference was completely eaten up by the maps issue (police, morcha and
>> what not. Obviously I am touchy about it.)
>>
>> It is really saddening to know that all the people from the community,
>> and various WMF connected organisations and user groups etc are absolutey
>> silent on it. Otherwise, they make so much noise on any minor points
>> happening here and there. And WMF staff also gets into the discussions.
>> There is complete silence now on the maps topic and legal issue.
>>
>> btw,
>> Have you noticed the change in Google maps of India? After the air strike
>> and F16 down, Google maps show the correct maps of India now (no Pakistan
>> or Chinese controlled areas etc)
>>
>> Legal experts, please comment. Your opinions are very important for all
>> of us.
>> Regards
>> -Sudhanwa
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, May 2, 2019 at 2:24 PM Anirudh S. Bhati 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The fact that the German court order had to do with a relatively private
>>> and low-profile individual could explain WMF's willingness to comply with
>>> the decision.  If, however, the ruling had to do with a high-profile
>>> individual in politics, or some political issue that raised substantial
>>> questions around free speech, then perhaps WMF's approach could have been
>>> different.
>>>
>>> At the same time, we should keep in mind that there are also strong
>>> financial reasons to comply with court rulings of the German courts, as WMF
>>> raises a significant amount of money from the German public.  If they had
>>> been facing a Laotian court order, for instance, their approach could have
>>> been very different.  I do think this had more to do with the fact that the
>>> court order dealt with a relatively private and low-profile person.
>>>
>>> How would WMF react to a situation like this in India?  I think it will
>>> be dealt on a case-by-case basis.
>>>
>>> Yours,
>>> Anirudh
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 2, 2019 at 3:15 AM Frederick Noronha <
>>> fredericknoro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Sudhanwa,

 This is a complex case, with legal (and perhaps technological)
 implications, so I'm not surprised by the lack of response.

 Law and technology seem to be moving in different directions here.

 (1) I am familiar with the journalistic/legal argument that the
 repetition of a defamatory statement is, in itself, defamation too.

 (2) On the other hand, the Wikipedia believes that all the edit
 histories should be retained, for convincing and sound reasons.

 But what happens if some defamatory statement gets 'embedded' in those
 histories?

 This is why I see a kind of conflict between law and the way technology
 (Wikis, in this case) seem to be evolving

 In some cases at least, the Wikipedia should challenge the rulings of
 the courts. (This one seemed to offer little time to do this.) I'm sure a
 number of pro bono lawyers will support such an important 

Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] WMF complying to court orders.

[Asaf Bartov]

Since you are disappointed at staff silence on this list, I will clarify: I
have no more insight into the legal issue, and the considerations that made
the WMF Legal team comply with the German court order, than you do.  Nor am
I a lawyer.  For me to offer any opinion on the matter would be
irresponsible.  The Legal team at WMF *is* in a position to address your
concern, and can be reached at le...@wikimedia.org.  As far as I know, none
of them reads this mailing list.

A.

On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 9:42 PM Sudhanwa Jogalekar 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> My point was not about the content or context of the court order but the
> compliance of it by WMF.
> For all these years, we have been told that WMF does not do anything on
> the content on wikipedia. And here is a case where even the history is also
> removed that too within a day to comply with a German court order which is
> obviously out of jurisdiction of any US laws under which WMF is required to
> be complaint.
>
> From the points mentioned by Anirudh, it is also clear that WMF probably
> does some(may be considerably more)  discrimination depending on the
> context. As such, it seems there is a bias within WMF and also on the
> content of WMF projects.
>
> For me, it is very much important that the Indian map issue IS a legal
> matter and WMF does not address it properly. This issue is being
> highlighted from the Wikiconference in Mumbai and it still continues.
> Almost all my time after leaving from Pune till I came back from the
> conference was completely eaten up by the maps issue (police, morcha and
> what not. Obviously I am touchy about it.)
>
> It is really saddening to know that all the people from the community, and
> various WMF connected organisations and user groups etc are absolutey
> silent on it. Otherwise, they make so much noise on any minor points
> happening here and there. And WMF staff also gets into the discussions.
> There is complete silence now on the maps topic and legal issue.
>
> btw,
> Have you noticed the change in Google maps of India? After the air strike
> and F16 down, Google maps show the correct maps of India now (no Pakistan
> or Chinese controlled areas etc)
>
> Legal experts, please comment. Your opinions are very important for all of
> us.
> Regards
> -Sudhanwa
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, May 2, 2019 at 2:24 PM Anirudh S. Bhati 
> wrote:
>
>> The fact that the German court order had to do with a relatively private
>> and low-profile individual could explain WMF's willingness to comply with
>> the decision.  If, however, the ruling had to do with a high-profile
>> individual in politics, or some political issue that raised substantial
>> questions around free speech, then perhaps WMF's approach could have been
>> different.
>>
>> At the same time, we should keep in mind that there are also strong
>> financial reasons to comply with court rulings of the German courts, as WMF
>> raises a significant amount of money from the German public.  If they had
>> been facing a Laotian court order, for instance, their approach could have
>> been very different.  I do think this had more to do with the fact that the
>> court order dealt with a relatively private and low-profile person.
>>
>> How would WMF react to a situation like this in India?  I think it will
>> be dealt on a case-by-case basis.
>>
>> Yours,
>> Anirudh
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, May 2, 2019 at 3:15 AM Frederick Noronha <
>> fredericknoro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Sudhanwa,
>>>
>>> This is a complex case, with legal (and perhaps technological)
>>> implications, so I'm not surprised by the lack of response.
>>>
>>> Law and technology seem to be moving in different directions here.
>>>
>>> (1) I am familiar with the journalistic/legal argument that the
>>> repetition of a defamatory statement is, in itself, defamation too.
>>>
>>> (2) On the other hand, the Wikipedia believes that all the edit
>>> histories should be retained, for convincing and sound reasons.
>>>
>>> But what happens if some defamatory statement gets 'embedded' in those
>>> histories?
>>>
>>> This is why I see a kind of conflict between law and the way technology
>>> (Wikis, in this case) seem to be evolving
>>>
>>> In some cases at least, the Wikipedia should challenge the rulings of
>>> the courts. (This one seemed to offer little time to do this.) I'm sure a
>>> number of pro bono lawyers will support such an important cause. FN
>>>
>>> On Thu, 2 May 2019 at 00:48, Sudhanwa Jogalekar 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Dear Indian Wikimedians,

 I had sent this mail earlier also and was expecting some comments on
 it. Somehow not a single person has replied to this mail.
 We talk so much on the list on many insignificant things. Many times
 WMF people also add their comments/views in it. But for such an important
 topic, that too of national interest, there is complete silence !! I am
 surprised and saddened.

 This was the original mail I sent on April 12th.
 

Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] WMF complying to court orders.

[Anirudh S. Bhati]

The fact that the German court order had to do with a relatively private
and low-profile individual could explain WMF's willingness to comply with
the decision.  If, however, the ruling had to do with a high-profile
individual in politics, or some political issue that raised substantial
questions around free speech, then perhaps WMF's approach could have been
different.

At the same time, we should keep in mind that there are also strong
financial reasons to comply with court rulings of the German courts, as WMF
raises a significant amount of money from the German public.  If they had
been facing a Laotian court order, for instance, their approach could have
been very different.  I do think this had more to do with the fact that the
court order dealt with a relatively private and low-profile person.

How would WMF react to a situation like this in India?  I think it will be
dealt on a case-by-case basis.

Yours,
Anirudh



On Thu, May 2, 2019 at 3:15 AM Frederick Noronha 
wrote:

> Hi Sudhanwa,
>
> This is a complex case, with legal (and perhaps technological)
> implications, so I'm not surprised by the lack of response.
>
> Law and technology seem to be moving in different directions here.
>
> (1) I am familiar with the journalistic/legal argument that the repetition
> of a defamatory statement is, in itself, defamation too.
>
> (2) On the other hand, the Wikipedia believes that all the edit histories
> should be retained, for convincing and sound reasons.
>
> But what happens if some defamatory statement gets 'embedded' in those
> histories?
>
> This is why I see a kind of conflict between law and the way technology
> (Wikis, in this case) seem to be evolving
>
> In some cases at least, the Wikipedia should challenge the rulings of the
> courts. (This one seemed to offer little time to do this.) I'm sure a
> number of pro bono lawyers will support such an important cause. FN
>
> On Thu, 2 May 2019 at 00:48, Sudhanwa Jogalekar 
> wrote:
>
>> Dear Indian Wikimedians,
>>
>> I had sent this mail earlier also and was expecting some comments on it.
>> Somehow not a single person has replied to this mail.
>> We talk so much on the list on many insignificant things. Many times WMF
>> people also add their comments/views in it. But for such an important
>> topic, that too of national interest, there is complete silence !! I am
>> surprised and saddened.
>>
>> This was the original mail I sent on April 12th.
>> ---
>>
>> Please check out this news from WMF.
>>
>>
>> https://wikimediafoundation.org/2019/04/11/a-german-court-forced-us-to-remove-part-of-a-wikipedia-articles-history-heres-what-that-means/
>>
>> This means WMF accepts court rulings across the world and take action
>> accordingly. What can happen in the case of India maps? Your views please.
>>
>> Regards
>> ---
>> --Sudhanwa
>>
>> ~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!
>> web: www.sudhanwa.com  blog: www.sudhanwa.in
>> Twitter: sudhanwa Check on FB, Linkedin for more.
>> ___
>> Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
>> Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
>>
> ___
> Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
> Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
>
___
Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l

Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] WMF complying to court orders.

[Frederick Noronha]

Hi Sudhanwa,

This is a complex case, with legal (and perhaps technological)
implications, so I'm not surprised by the lack of response.

Law and technology seem to be moving in different directions here.

(1) I am familiar with the journalistic/legal argument that the repetition
of a defamatory statement is, in itself, defamation too.

(2) On the other hand, the Wikipedia believes that all the edit histories
should be retained, for convincing and sound reasons.

But what happens if some defamatory statement gets 'embedded' in those
histories?

This is why I see a kind of conflict between law and the way technology
(Wikis, in this case) seem to be evolving

In some cases at least, the Wikipedia should challenge the rulings of the
courts. (This one seemed to offer little time to do this.) I'm sure a
number of pro bono lawyers will support such an important cause. FN

On Thu, 2 May 2019 at 00:48, Sudhanwa Jogalekar 
wrote:

> Dear Indian Wikimedians,
>
> I had sent this mail earlier also and was expecting some comments on it.
> Somehow not a single person has replied to this mail.
> We talk so much on the list on many insignificant things. Many times WMF
> people also add their comments/views in it. But for such an important
> topic, that too of national interest, there is complete silence !! I am
> surprised and saddened.
>
> This was the original mail I sent on April 12th.
> ---
>
> Please check out this news from WMF.
>
>
> https://wikimediafoundation.org/2019/04/11/a-german-court-forced-us-to-remove-part-of-a-wikipedia-articles-history-heres-what-that-means/
>
> This means WMF accepts court rulings across the world and take action
> accordingly. What can happen in the case of India maps? Your views please.
>
> Regards
> ---
> --Sudhanwa
>
> ~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!
> web: www.sudhanwa.com  blog: www.sudhanwa.in
> Twitter: sudhanwa Check on FB, Linkedin for more.
> ___
> Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
> Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
>
___
Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l

[Wikimediaindia-l] WMF complying to court orders.

[Sudhanwa Jogalekar]

Dear Indian Wikimedians,

I had sent this mail earlier also and was expecting some comments on it.
Somehow not a single person has replied to this mail.
We talk so much on the list on many insignificant things. Many times WMF
people also add their comments/views in it. But for such an important
topic, that too of national interest, there is complete silence !! I am
surprised and saddened.

This was the original mail I sent on April 12th.
---

Please check out this news from WMF.

https://wikimediafoundation.org/2019/04/11/a-german-court-forced-us-to-remove-part-of-a-wikipedia-articles-history-heres-what-that-means/

This means WMF accepts court rulings across the world and take action
accordingly. What can happen in the case of India maps? Your views please.

Regards
---
--Sudhanwa

~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!
web: www.sudhanwa.com  blog: www.sudhanwa.in
Twitter: sudhanwa Check on FB, Linkedin for more.
___
Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l

[Wikimediaindia-l] WMF complying to court orders.

[Sudhanwa Jogalekar]

Hi,

Please check out this news from WMF.

https://wikimediafoundation.org/2019/04/11/a-german-court-forced-us-to-remove-part-of-a-wikipedia-articles-history-heres-what-that-means/

This means WMF accepts court rulings across the world and take action
accordingly. What can happen in the case of India maps? Your views please.

Regards
Sudhanwa
___
Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l