>
> *I really don't know how long CU information is retained *
>

3 months. All CU logs are kept for 3 months
_____
*Béria Lima*
<http://wikimedia.pt>
*Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter
livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos a
construir esse sonho. <http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos>*


On 31 May 2012 10:43, Theo10011 <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 6:48 PM, Andreas Kolbe <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Theo, that is completely wrong. Record-keeping requirements only apply to
>> images where models were required to engage in actual sexually explicit
>> conduct, and moreover, it only applies to images created from 1990 onward.
>>
>
> I reread the information I based my conclusion on. I must be missing some
> part that you are referring to. Even the definition of "secondary
> producers" and its distinction from "primary producers" is linked and
> explained at length in articles related to legislation 2257.
>
> You gave the definition of sexually explicit content from Cornell law that
> I based my understanding on, " (v) lascivious exhibition of the genitals or
> pubic area of any person." - is a giant definition to cover a lot of
> content, regardless of its purpose.
>
> The single prosecution based on that law has been against the "Girls Gone
> Wild" producer, they weren't exactly charged for any other form of sexually
> explicit content beyond depiction of "genitals or pubic area" and lack of
> proper record-keeping.
>
>
> Again, that is completely wrong. Facebook and the Wikimedia Foundation are
>> already protected by 230(c) safe harbor provisions. Responsibility lies
>> with the individual uploader or editor, who enjoys no such protection but
>> is fully liable for their own actions.
>>
>
> Here in lies the burden on the service providers. The complete record of
> the uploader/editor/individual would lie with the service provider. Edit
> histories and contribution list provide next to no information on the real
> world identities of editors, not even where they are located. The only
> possible link, even the country of residence would be information only
> available to the service provider in the form of their IP address.
>
> Outside prosecutors can not prosecute, or charge any editor based on their
> username, whether its User:someguy542 or User:Ladiesman232, there is no
> real world link without the IP records. That is where the burden comes on
> the service provider. In order to prosecute and get that information
> legally, the burden passes to the provider. This actually happens all the
> time, requests are made by prosecutors, law-enforcers, to legally get the
> information to prosecute, just not in cases of record-keeping violations.
> There have been new developments related to this, IP addresses not being
> directly culpable of actions as such, or not being culpable of the
> individual paying for the said IP connection but that's another discussion.
>
>
>>
>> The thing is: Wikimedia keeps edit histories and contributions lists for
>> decades. We have no idea what implementation of US law will look like in
>> five or ten years' time, given political vagaries.
>>
>
> Yes, but those edit histories and contribution lists are useless in their
> public form. More so, in Wikimedia's case than say Facebook. The only
> relevant information is the IP address, which again open up a whole new
> door of privacy and how far Wikimedia would go to defend or infringe on it.
> I really don't know how long CU information is retained vs. edit histories,
> but if they are indeed kept for decades, it might turn into a liability.
> The speed at which IP addresses can change, even entire blocks move, even
> that history might become unusable in 1-2 years.
>
> Regards
> Theo
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gendergap mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>
>
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Reply via email to