Wikipedia will black out for 24 hours starting 5pm tomorrow. Below is why. 



I will take a public stand here and urge our community to pay more attention 
and take action on these issues because they effect us all.  Anyone forwarding 
an E-mail from a friend, or watching a YouTube video, or wanting access to 
legally modify content to create accessible versions of textbooks without the 
chance of being taken to court,  will be effected as most of this stuff is 
copyrighted somewhere and they want to stop the free and open distribution of 
this content.  Perhaps it’s inevitable that the open internet must die, but it 
will be a sad day.  We in the U.S. at least have the opportunity to make sure 
it doesn’t happen for a while.



Reginald George

Adaptive Technology Specialist











English Wikipedia anti-SOPA blackout - Wikimedia Foundation

 

English Wikipedia anti-SOPA blackout

 

To: English Wikipedia Readers and Community  From: Sue Gardner, Wikimedia 
Foundation Executive Director  Date: January 16, 2012   

 

Today, the Wikipedia community announced its decision to black out the 
English-language Wikipedia for 24 hours, worldwide, beginning at 05:00 UTC on 
Wednesday, January 18 (you can read the 

statement from the Wikimedia Foundation here). The blackout is a protest 
against proposed legislation in the United States—the Stop Online Piracy Act 
(SOPA) in the U.S. House of Representatives, and the PROTECT IP Act (PIPA) in 
the U.S. Senate—that, if passed, would seriously damage the free and open 
Internet, including Wikipedia. 

 

This will be the first time the English Wikipedia has ever staged a public 
protest of this nature, and it’s a decision that wasn’t lightly made. Here’s 
how it’s been described by the three Wikipedia administrators who formally 
facilitated the community’s discussion. From the public statement, signed by 
User:NuclearWarfare, User:Risker and User:Billinghurst: 

It is the opinion of the English Wikipedia community that both of these bills, 
if passed, would be devastating to the free and open web. 

Over the course of the past 72 hours, over 1800 Wikipedians have joined 
together to discuss proposed actions that the community might wish to take 
against SOPA and PIPA. This is by far the largest level of participation in a 
community discussion ever seen on Wikipedia, which illustrates the level of 
concern that Wikipedians feel about this proposed legislation. The overwhelming 
majority of participants support community action to encourage greater public 
action in response to these two bills. Of the proposals considered by 
Wikipedians, those that would result in a “blackout” of the English Wikipedia, 
in concert with similar blackouts on other websites opposed to SOPA and PIPA, 
received the strongest support. 

On careful review of this discussion, the closing administrators note the 
broad-based support for action from Wikipedians around the world, not just from 
within the United States. The primary objection to a global blackout came from 
those who preferred that the blackout be limited to readers from the United 
States, with the rest of the world seeing a simple banner notice instead. We 
also noted that roughly 55% of those supporting a blackout preferred that it be 
a global one, with many pointing to concerns about similar legislation in other 
nations. 

 

In making this decision, Wikipedians will be criticized for seeming to abandon 
neutrality to take a political position. That’s a real, legitimate issue. We 
want people to trust Wikipedia, not worry that it is trying to propagandize 
them. 

 

But although Wikipedia’s articles are neutral, its existence is not. As 
Wikimedia Foundation board member Kat Walsh wrote on one of our mailing lists 
recently, 

We depend on a legal infrastructure that makes it possible for us to operate. 
And we depend on a legal infrastructure that also allows other sites to host 
user-contributed material, both information and expression. For the most part, 
Wikimedia projects are organizing and summarizing and collecting the world’s 
knowledge. We’re putting it in context, and showing people how to make to sense 
of it. 

But that knowledge has to be published somewhere for anyone to find and use it. 
Where it can be censored without due process, it hurts the speaker, the public, 
and Wikimedia. Where you can only speak if you have sufficient resources to 
fight legal challenges, or, if your views are pre-approved by someone who does, 
the same narrow set of ideas already popular will continue to be all anyone has 
meaningful access to. 

 

The decision to shut down the English Wikipedia wasn’t made by me; it was made 
by editors, through a consensus decision-making process. But I support it. 

 

Like Kat and the rest of the Wikimedia Foundation Board, I have increasingly 
begun to think of Wikipedia’s public voice, and the goodwill people have for 
Wikipedia, as a resource that wants to be used for the benefit of the public. 
Readers trust Wikipedia because they know that despite its faults, Wikipedia’s 
heart is in the right place. It’s not aiming to monetize their eyeballs or make 
them believe some particular thing, or sell them a product. Wikipedia has no 
hidden agenda: it just wants to be helpful. 

 

That’s less true of other sites. Most are commercially motivated: their purpose 
is to make money. That doesn’t mean they don’t have a desire to make the world 
a better place—many do!—but it does mean that their positions and actions need 
to be understood in the context of conflicting interests. 

 

My hope is that when Wikipedia shuts down on January 18, people will understand 
that we’re doing it for our readers. We support everyone’s right to freedom of 
thought and freedom of expression. We think everyone should have access to 
educational material on a wide range of subjects, even if they can’t pay for 
it. We believe in a free and open Internet where information can be shared 
without impediment. We believe that new proposed laws like SOPA—and PIPA, and 
other similar laws under discussion inside and outside the United States—don’t 
advance the interests of the general public. You can read a very good list of 
reasons to oppose SOPA and PIPA here, from the Electronic Frontier Foundation. 

 

Why is this a global action, rather than US-only? And why now, if some American 
legislators appear to be in tactical retreat on SOPA? 

 

The reality is that we don’t think SOPA is going away, and PIPA is still quite 
active. Moreover, SOPA and PIPA are just indicators of a much broader problem. 
All around the world, we're seeing the development of legislation intended to 
fight online piracy, and regulate the Internet in other ways, that hurt online 
freedoms. Our concern extends beyond SOPA and PIPA: they are just part of the 
problem. We want the Internet to remain free and open, everywhere, for 
everyone. 

 

 

Make your voice heard! 

 

Bookmark with Facebook Share on Facebook Bookmark with Facebook  Share on 
Twitter Share on Twitter Share on Twitter  Share on reddit.com Share on reddit 
Share on reddit.com  Share on Digg.com Share on Digg Share on Digg.com 

 

On January 18, we hope you’ll agree with us, and will do what you can to make 
your own voice heard. 

 

Sue Gardner, Executive Director, Wikimedia Foundation   

 

Comment on this post!

 

list of 1 items

Log in Alt+o 

list end

 

list of 2 items

Page Alt+c 

Discussion Alt+t 

list end

 

list of 3 items

Read

Contribute Alt+e 

View history Alt+h 

list end

 


Search Wikimedia Foundation [alt-f] Alt+f

SearchSearch the pages for this text 

Visit the main page

 

list of 10 items

Home Alt+z 

FAQ

Our projects

Press room

Contact us

Staff and contractors

Wikimedia blog

Job openings

Local chapters

Questions for Wikimedia?

list end

 

Support

list of 3 items

Donate

Benefactors

Volunteering

list end

 

Corporate

 

Wiki

 

Print/export

 

Toolbox

list of 2 items

This page was last modified on 17 January 2012, at 08:34.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License; 
additional terms may apply. See 

Terms of use for details.

list end

list of 4 items

Privacy policy

About Wikimedia Foundation

Disclaimers

Mobile view
_______________________________________________
ATI (Adaptive Technology Inc.)
A special interest affiliate of the Missouri Council of the Blind
http://moblind.org/membership/affiliates/adaptive_technology

Reply via email to