Re: [Wikimediauk-l] FOI request to Met over IWF / Wikipedia controversy rejected
2009/1/8 geni : > 2009/1/8 Andrew Gray : >> 2009/1/8 Owen Blacker : >> >>> I don't suppose anyone has any evidence that the IWF definitely contacted a >>> specific police force, do they? :o) >> >> It's interesting - we always seem to have assumed the Met, but a quick >> search suggests this isn't publicly stated anywhere, and other police >> forces talk vaguely of cooperating with them as well. >> >> It might be rewarding to dig through newspaper archives of the last >> few years to see what's been written about the way they work. > > They were formed due to chief inspector Stephen French of the > Metropolitan Police explaining to the ISPs what would happen if they > didn't do something. > > In terms of the way they works see this mailing list: > > http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/pipermail/ukcrypto/2008-December/thread.html#85788 > the subject being "cleanfeed and wikipedia". Lot to read but it gives > some idea of the history of the IWF and cleenfeed (which was not > initially an IWF project). > > > -- > geni > highlights: http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/pipermail/ukcrypto/2008-December/085830.html http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/pipermail/ukcrypto/2008-December/085840.html http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/pipermail/ukcrypto/2008-December/085903.html http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/pipermail/ukcrypto/2008-December/086192.html http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/pipermail/ukcrypto/2008-December/085917.html http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/pipermail/ukcrypto/2008-December/085821.html <--some info on the audit http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/pipermail/ukcrypto/2008-December/086026.html <--suggests the body they consulted with was CEOP which may be FOIA proof. http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/pipermail/ukcrypto/2008-December/085887.html <-some info on their board politics http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/pipermail/ukcrypto/2008-December/085975.html Some info on why the IWF are allowed to view the stuff: http://www.cps.gov.uk/Publications/docs/mousexoffences.pdf -- geni ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] FOI request to Met over IWF / Wikipedia controversy rejected
2009/1/8 geni : > 2009/1/8 Owen Blacker : >> I don't suppose anyone has any evidence that the IWF definitely contacted a >> specific police force, do they? :o) > > No. From what we know now know of their internal operations the > determination as to an image's status is done internally by their own > trained staff. They were audited in 2006/7? by an external group > (university academics) but the details of that are somewhat hazy. They claimed to have consulted the police, but to what extent, we don't know. ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] FOI request to Met over IWF / Wikipedia controversy rejected
2009/1/8 Andrew Gray : > 2009/1/8 Owen Blacker : > >> I don't suppose anyone has any evidence that the IWF definitely contacted a >> specific police force, do they? :o) > > It's interesting - we always seem to have assumed the Met, but a quick > search suggests this isn't publicly stated anywhere, and other police > forces talk vaguely of cooperating with them as well. > > It might be rewarding to dig through newspaper archives of the last > few years to see what's been written about the way they work. They were formed due to chief inspector Stephen French of the Metropolitan Police explaining to the ISPs what would happen if they didn't do something. In terms of the way they works see this mailing list: http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/pipermail/ukcrypto/2008-December/thread.html#85788 the subject being "cleanfeed and wikipedia". Lot to read but it gives some idea of the history of the IWF and cleenfeed (which was not initially an IWF project). -- geni ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] FOI request to Met over IWF / Wikipedia controversy rejected
2009/1/8 Owen Blacker : > I don't suppose anyone has any evidence that the IWF definitely contacted a > specific police force, do they? :o) It's interesting - we always seem to have assumed the Met, but a quick search suggests this isn't publicly stated anywhere, and other police forces talk vaguely of cooperating with them as well. It might be rewarding to dig through newspaper archives of the last few years to see what's been written about the way they work. -- - Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] FOI request to Met over IWF / Wikipedia controversy rejected
2009/1/8 Owen Blacker : > I don't suppose anyone has any evidence that the IWF definitely contacted a > specific police force, do they? :o) No. From what we know now know of their internal operations the determination as to an image's status is done internally by their own trained staff. They were audited in 2006/7? by an external group (university academics) but the details of that are somewhat hazy. -- geni ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
