On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 10:08 AM, Anthony <wikim...@inbox.org> wrote:
> You specifically contrasted regulations "as a corporation" with > regulations "by virtue of its being a nonprofit corporation". I > responded to both. You then quoted my response to the first, with > information with respect to the second. I'm still not sure what you're taking issue with here. >> As for WMF's tax status, I'm not going to talk about that -- I simply >> pointed out that 501(c) organizations are regulated. > > 501(c) *is a tax status*. 501(c)(3) is a subset of that tax status. So? I gave you pointers to regs for 501(c)(3), (c)(4), etc. >> I'm entirely comfortable with The New York Times Company (a >> corporation) and its efforts to influence the outcome of elections >> (e.g., through candidate endorsements; I wouldn't want to prohibit The >> New York Times Company from political speech. > > And fortunately, Citizens United helped protect their right to do so. That is certainly the ACLU's view (if I recall correctly), and I appreciate that view, although I think the problem of the corrupting influence of corporate expenditures remains, and I still think it's possible, per the whole line of Supreme Court cases leading up through Citizens United, to regulate the problem of election-targeted expenditures constitutionally. (In short, I slightly disagree with ACLU's position, but only slightly.) What this has to do with WMF or the Russian-language Wikimedians' activism is still beyond me, however. --Mike _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l