Grazie! :)
2011/10/13 Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com:
Nickanc Wikipedia, 12/10/2011 14:21:
Yes, there are these groups, but in most wikipedias they have few
persons inside it and they have almost no policy;
That's because few people need it.
In it wiki basta una riga in [[WP:RA]],
Yes, there are these groups, but in most wikipedias they have few
persons inside it and they have almost no policy; moreover if you look
for global ipblock exempt you may found that they are still vulnerable
to IP and IP range blocks made locally on individual wikis
Nickanc Wikipedia, 12/10/2011 14:21:
Yes, there are these groups, but in most wikipedias they have few
persons inside it and they have almost no policy;
That's because few people need it.
In it wiki basta una riga in [[WP:RA]], secondo me.
moreover if you look
for global ipblock exempt you
Ilario writes:
We have two ways: to be passive or to be active. If we choose the
passivity, it means that we can only organize a system of proxies like
done in China or to organize some workarounds to make Wikipedia
available to the person living in totalitarism.
The Italian
Nickanc Wikipedia, 10/10/2011 22:59:
Why dont allow Ip block exemptions for TOR when
wikipedians are strongly biased by local laws?
This is already possible on all wikis with ipblock-exempt group and
is/was used mainly for Chinese wikipedians AFAIK.
Everybody happily editing on clandestinity
On 10/06/11 6:33 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
Thomas Morton, 05/10/2011 12:31:
On 5 October 2011 11:20, church.of.emacs.ml
Are you seriously comparing that italien law to the proposed image filter?
Are you aware of the principle of proportionality? What might be okay to
do against a law
Ray Saintonge, 08/10/2011 11:11:
I'm happy that the Italian language Wikipedia is back in business, and I
hope that in the future projects will find better ways to protest than
suicide strategies. The key point is that Wikipedias are based on
languages, not countries. For Italian there is a
On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 12:44 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo)
nemow...@gmail.com wrote:
Ray Saintonge, 08/10/2011 11:11:
I'm happy that the Italian language Wikipedia is back in business, and I
hope that in the future projects will find better ways to protest than
suicide strategies. The key point is
On 08.10.2011 11:11, Ray Saintonge wrote:
I'm happy that the Italian language Wikipedia is back in business, and I
hope that in the future projects will find better ways to protest than
suicide strategies. The key point is that Wikipedias are based on
languages, not countries. For Italian
Ilario writes:
We have two ways: to be passive or to be active. If we choose the
passivity, it means that we can only organize a system of proxies like
done in China or to organize some workarounds to make Wikipedia
available to the person living in totalitarism.
The Italian community has
On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 4:03 AM, Mike Godwin mnemo...@gmail.com wrote:
Again, speaking only for myself, I believe the Italian Wikimedians
made the right choice, and I believe that, so long as this tactic is
not overused, a strike may be the best and most effective response to
other
On 10/05/11 11:04 AM, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
Speaking as a citizen of a country with a fairly stringently worded
Right of reply law. I don't think it has ever been applied against
an encyclopaedia, or a blog or Usenet thread or anything remotely like
that. I think it is very cogently only
Andreas Kolbe, 06/10/2011 02:11:
Well, that *is* nuts. Moreover, the 48-hour time period and potential €12,000
fine in the
proposed law are nuts (pity the blogger who has gone on a 2-week holiday).
Yet that
€12,000 fine is not mentioned in the it:WP statement. Being forced to include
a
Thomas Morton, 05/10/2011 00:23:
I'm still a little bit confused how this will impact Wikipedia, though.
The law seems to be clear in identifying the website owner as the person to
contact; which is a US not-for-profit.
Which law? And which law speaks of website owner? Anyone can be asked to
Ray Saintonge, 05/10/2011 10:46:
If they are so fearful they can use pseudonyms. They would then need to
get a legal order from a US court to identify the users.
But all users would need to do so, because a random user or sysop could
be asked to publish the correction/statement. On wiki there
On 6 October 2011 12:49, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com wrote:
But all users would need to do so, because a random user or sysop could
be asked to publish the correction/statement. On wiki there was a
discussion about how to globally implement such a switch to clandestine
accounts...
Andreas Kolbe, 05/10/2011 12:49:
Even this corrected version does not seem to be right. As I understand the
proposed law,
the subject would have the right for a statement to be shown, unaltered, on
the page (which
actually would be possible for Wikipedia to do, via a transcluded and
No dia 6 de Outubro de 2011 14:01, Federico Leva (Nemo)
nemow...@gmail.comescreveu:
This doesn't mean that we've misinformed users: prominent jurists agree
that the proposed law is absolutely crazy for Wikipedia and other
websites; and the community had discussed and assessed the effects of
Lodewijk, 06/10/2011 14:24:
No dia 6 de Outubro de 2011 14:01, Federico Leva (Nemo)
escreveu:
This doesn't mean that we've misinformed users: prominent jurists agree
that the proposed law is absolutely crazy for Wikipedia and other
websites; and the community had discussed and assessed the
Thomas Goldammer, 05/10/2011 09:21:
2011/10/5 Samuel Kleinmeta...@gmail.com:
CLPI has a good practical summary of the law in this area:
http://www.clpi.org/the-law/faq
interesting:
Q. If a charity incorporated in this country has an Australian (for
example) affiliate that lobbies
I mean Wikipedia (or websites like Wikipedia) specific. Italian text will
have to do - Google translate does miracles :) I think what would be really
great is a set of statements/suggestions, so not just by one expert. For
one, the Rodotà statement was not exactly what I was looking for at some
Thomas Morton, 05/10/2011 12:31:
On 5 October 2011 11:20, church.of.emacs.ml
Are you seriously comparing that italien law to the proposed image filter?
Are you aware of the principle of proportionality? What might be okay to
do against a law that would kill Wikipedia is different from what is
2011/10/5 Samuel Klein meta...@gmail.com:
CLPI has a good practical summary of the law in this area:
http://www.clpi.org/the-law/faq
interesting:
Q. If a charity incorporated in this country has an Australian (for
example) affiliate that lobbies (according to United States
definitions of
You heard about consensus and anti-censorship actions: all is allowed with
community polls as seen in Italian Wikipedia yesterday.
German Wikipedia, go ahead and blank your wiki is WMF try to force the image
filtering on you. The same for other Wikipedias that don't agree with the
filter. Enjoy
On 10/04/11 6:03 AM, Ilario Valdelli wrote:
The question is that the server are in USA, but for the penal law it's
sufficient to edit from the Italian country.
I am in a special situation because I live in Switzerland and I
publish in USA servers, but for the main numbers of Italian editors
Not really Ray. And even so, the problem is not the fear of getting
arrested, is more the cost of a law suit. In Italy (as in some other Latin
countries) law suits are expensive (really, REALLY expensives) and take
forever to end.
_
*Béria Lima*
http://wikimedia.pt/(351) 925 171 484
*Imagine
Am 05.10.2011 10:46, schrieb Ray Saintonge:
On 10/04/11 6:03 AM, Ilario Valdelli wrote:
The question is that the server are in USA, but for the penal law it's
sufficient to edit from the Italian country.
I am in a special situation because I live in Switzerland and I
publish in USA servers,
On 10/05/11 2:06 AM, Béria Lima wrote:
Not really Ray. And even so, the problem is not the fear of getting
arrested, is more the cost of a law suit. In Italy (as in some other Latin
countries) law suits are expensive (really, REALLY expensives) and take
forever to end.
Lawsuits can be
On 10/05/2011 06:25 AM, Aaron Adrignola wrote:
I'm sure those on this list are familiar with the de.wikipedia poll on the
proposed image filter with its strong outcome on a particular side of the
debate. I am quite concerned about the precedent that it.wikipedia is being
allowed to set.
On 5 October 2011 11:20, church.of.emacs.ml
church.of.emacs...@googlemail.com wrote:
On 10/05/2011 06:25 AM, Aaron Adrignola wrote:
I'm sure those on this list are familiar with the de.wikipedia poll on
the
proposed image filter with its strong outcome on a particular side of the
debate.
] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia - What exactly does
the proposed law say?
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Date: Wednesday, 5 October, 2011, 6:23
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com wrote:
John Vandenberg, 05/10/2011 00:16
Regardless, what's done is done, for
the moment.
Except that WMF as steward of the open information can roll any of that
blackout crap back.
Primary mission is spreading the knowledge, and now it.wikipedia obviously
fails at it.
Domas
___
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 12:49, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@yahoo.com wrote:
Even this corrected version does not seem to be right. As I understand the
proposed law,
the subject would have the right for a statement to be shown, unaltered, on
the page (which
actually would be possible for Wikipedia
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 2:05 PM, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 12:49, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@yahoo.com wrote:
Even this corrected version does not seem to be right. As I understand the
proposed law,
the subject would have the right for a statement to be shown,
Except that WMF as steward of the open information can roll any of that
blackout crap back.
Domas
There's no need to be so drastic. If WMF wishes the block to be removed, it
simply can ask it and we'll do. In a couple of minutes. We're not moving war
against WMF.
Howerer, at the moment WMF
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 1:00 PM, Domas Mituzas midom.li...@gmail.com wrote:
Regardless, what's done is done, for
the moment.
Except that WMF as steward of the open information can roll any of that
blackout crap back.
Primary mission is spreading the knowledge, and now it.wikipedia obviously
the subject would have the right for a statement to be shown, unaltered, on
the page (which
actually would be possible for Wikipedia to do, via a transcluded and
protected template).
I think not. The transcluded template can be deleted from the article, if
you don't block the article itself
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2011 13:58:51 -0700
From: Sue Gardner sgard...@wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Message-ID:
CAGZ0=ln0xlr-0a0ajocu-7ex1bkqfynvv5xetqy5uy9lqdu
2011/10/5 David Richfield davidrichfi...@gmail.com:
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 1:00 PM, Domas Mituzas midom.li...@gmail.com wrote:
Regardless, what's done is done, for
the moment.
Except that WMF as steward of the open information can roll any of that
blackout crap back.
Primary mission is
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 4:00 AM, Domas Mituzas midom.li...@gmail.com wrote:
Except that WMF as steward of the open information can roll any of that
blackout crap back.
The only thing we truly could do is restore read access. But if the
it.wikipedia community really wants to strike, there's very
The only thing we truly could do is restore read access. But if the
it.wikipedia community really wants to strike, there's very little we
can do to stop them. :)
I sure agree with that. There're plenty of ways to inflict pain without
terminating the service entirely.
Editor strike means not
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 16:03, Domas Mituzas midom.li...@gmail.com wrote:
When writers guild went on strike, we could still watch old stuff, right, it
wasn't pulled ;-)
If doctors go on strike, people are still allowed to live, retroactive
disease correction is not done...
When truck drivers
Of all the ways to protest the law, I think it.wp chose the most noticeable
way. If something like a sitenotice were implemented, many people would just
scroll past it. Even if not, they would only read it a couple times, because
people access Wikipedia for the content. OTOH, just locking
Of late I've often round reasons to be critical of the choices the WMF has
made, but in this case you've made the best choice possible - supporting the
community on it.wikipedia in a decision that they've come to as a group,
even though that decision is controversial in some places. Bravo
I am sure other people can fill in, but I heard there has been some movement
within the parliament in reaction. They are reconsidering a portion of that
law that might affect us, or so I have been told.
http://www.rainews24.rai.it/it/news.php?newsid=157111
Can someone clarify?
Regards
Theo
On
On 10/5/2011 7:03 AM, Domas Mituzas wrote:
The only thing we truly could do is restore read access. But if the
it.wikipedia community really wants to strike, there's very little we
can do to stop them. :)
I sure agree with that. There're plenty of ways to inflict pain without
terminating the
2011/10/5 Michael Snow wikipe...@frontier.com
On 10/5/2011 7:03 AM, Domas Mituzas wrote:
The only thing we truly could do is restore read access. But if the
it.wikipedia community really wants to strike, there's very little we
can do to stop them. :)
I sure agree with that. There're
On 10/5/2011 9:45 AM, emijrp wrote:
2011/10/5 Michael Snowwikipe...@frontier.com
On 10/5/2011 7:03 AM, Domas Mituzas wrote:
Editor strike means not editing, it doesn't mean full service downtime.
When labor unions go on strike, they do more than not show up for work.
They form picket lines
2011/10/5 Michael Snow wikipe...@frontier.com
On 10/5/2011 9:45 AM, emijrp wrote:
2011/10/5 Michael Snowwikipe...@frontier.com
On 10/5/2011 7:03 AM, Domas Mituzas wrote:
Editor strike means not editing, it doesn't mean full service downtime.
When labor unions go on strike, they do more
--- On Wed, 5/10/11, Jalo jal...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Jalo jal...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia - What exactly does
the proposed law say?
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Date: Wednesday, 5 October, 2011, 12:40
--- On Wed, 5/10/11, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen cimonav...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Jussi-Ville Heiskanen cimonav...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia - What exactly does
the proposed law say?
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Date
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 2:46 PM, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote:
There seems to be a situation developing at Italian Wikipedia related to a
local law that would infringe neutrality on Wikipedia. The discussions even
mention a possible blackout/lockdown in reaction.
Currently, anything I try
On 05.10.2011 20:43, Austin Hair wrote:
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 2:46 PM, Theo10011de10...@gmail.com wrote:
There seems to be a situation developing at Italian Wikipedia related to a
local law that would infringe neutrality on Wikipedia. The discussions even
mention a possible blackout/lockdown
That's stupid.
On 10/4/11, Mathias Schindler mathias.schind...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 22:19, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 4:15 PM, teun spaans teun.spa...@gmail.com wrote:
Isn't this premature? As I understand, the law is still being discussed,
not
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 9:36 PM, Ilario Valdelli valde...@gmail.com wrote:
Make a logout and after make a new login.
I wasn't logged in, to begin with. I was looking at it as any casual
reader would.
Austin
___
foundation-l mailing list
I wasn't logged in, to begin with. I was looking at it as any casual
reader would.
Austin
To me, it works. Which browser are you using?
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 9:47 PM, The Cunctator cuncta...@gmail.com wrote:
On 10/4/11, Mathias Schindler mathias.schind...@gmail.com wrote:
How many inches are we away from keeping a list of politicians and
parties we endorse in national, state and regional elections?
That's stupid.
I think
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 10:52 PM, Jalo jal...@gmail.com wrote:
To me, it works. Which browser are you using?
Firefox 7.0.1 on OS X 10.6.6, not logged into anything.
Austin
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
On 10/04/11 3:14 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
WereSpielChequers, 04/10/2011 23:46:
If someone tried to use this law
to
force an editor to publish a rebuttal of something posted before the
freeze, then surely that would be retrospective legislation?
I don't see why. Web pages are
Given that a Wikipedia biography is usually the first google hit to come up
for a name, it
doesn't actually strike me as *that* ludicrous. What Wikipedia writes about a
person reaches
more readers today than a New York Times article. As someone else mentioned
recently,
there is a
Domas writes:
Except that WMF as steward of the open information can roll any of that
blackout crap back.
Primary mission is spreading the knowledge, and now it.wikipedia obviously
fails at it.
I believe this interpretation is both unfair and incorrect. The
Italian Wikipedians are trying
--- On Wed, 5/10/11, Andrea Zanni zanni.andre...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Andrea Zanni zanni.andre...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia - What exactly does
the proposed law say?
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Date: Wednesday
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 3:11 AM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@yahoo.com wrote:
--- On Wed, 5/10/11, Andrea Zanni zanni.andre...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Andrea Zanni zanni.andre...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian Wikipedia - What exactly does
the proposed law say
Hi
There seems to be a situation developing at Italian Wikipedia related to a
local law that would infringe neutrality on Wikipedia. The discussions even
mention a possible blackout/lockdown in reaction.
Is anyone aware of this situation? Is it likely to have any effect on other
projects and
I think this is a prime opportunity to point out to those concerned:
Wikipedia is hosted in the US :) so no need to worry!
Tom
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
I think this is a prime opportunity to point out to those concerned:
Wikipedia is hosted in the US :) so no need to worry!
They can block Italian Wikipedia in Italy, right? If so, it is a concern.
--
Tanvir Rahman
Wikitanvir on Wikimedia
___
2011/10/4 Thomas Morton morton.tho...@googlemail.com:
I think this is a prime opportunity to point out to those concerned:
Wikipedia is hosted in the US :) so no need to worry!
Are you sure? Contributors lives mainly in Italy, so they have to
follow Italian law.
--
Tomek Polimerek Ganicz
2011/10/4 Tanvir Rahman wikitan...@gmail.com:
I think this is a prime opportunity to point out to those concerned:
Wikipedia is hosted in the US :) so no need to worry!
They can block Italian Wikipedia in Italy, right? If so, it is a concern.
The other issue is, that if you are italian
On 4 October 2011 13:56, Tomasz Ganicz polime...@gmail.com wrote:
2011/10/4 Thomas Morton morton.tho...@googlemail.com:
I think this is a prime opportunity to point out to those concerned:
Wikipedia is hosted in the US :) so no need to worry!
Are you sure? Contributors lives mainly in
An official statement will be published in Foundation-l.
The question is that the server are in USA, but for the penal law it's
sufficient to edit from the Italian country.
I am in a special situation because I live in Switzerland and I
publish in USA servers, but for the main numbers of Italian
On 4 October 2011 08:57, Tanvir Rahman wikitan...@gmail.com wrote:
I think this is a prime opportunity to point out to those concerned:
Wikipedia is hosted in the US :) so no need to worry!
They can block Italian Wikipedia in Italy, right? If so, it is a concern.
Perhaps someone who
On 4 October 2011 14:03, Ilario Valdelli valde...@gmail.com wrote:
An official statement will be published in Foundation-l.
The question is that the server are in USA, but for the penal law it's
sufficient to edit from the Italian country.
I am in a special situation because I live in
://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utente:Vituzzu/comunicato/en). This decision
will be implemented as soon as possible, during the next 12 hours.
Giovanni AKA Pap3rinik (sysop at it.wikip)
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2011 18:16:41 +0530
From: Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com
Subject: [Foundation-l] Blackout at Italian
Because of such a risk (it’s easily understandable that this rule will make
encyclopedia articles as pure “frames” for unchangeable text imposed by
others), the Italian community has decided, by a vast majority (see
http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bar/Discussioni/Comma_29_e_Wikipedia
I think it is fairly easy to make such statements when you live abroad, and
are not directly influenced by its outcomes.
As a side note, if this strike goes through (I could both understand it if
it does, and if it doesn't), I would recommand to add a link to an English
translation at least, for
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 9:12 AM, Donaldo Papero pap3ri...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
Here are the facts: the Italian parliament will discuss within few days –
and most likely approve – a law which, among the other things, will
introduce the duty, for every web site (included, and not limited to,
On 4 October 2011 14:40, Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.org wrote:
I think it is fairly easy to make such statements when you live abroad, and
are not directly influenced by its outcomes.
I live in the UK; where our defamation laws definitely make it very risky to
edit Wikipedia (context;
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 7:10 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Giovanni (or Donaldo?),
Has anyone at it.wp been in touch with Foundation staff? Locking a
major wiki seems like a pretty big step, perhaps they could provide
some advice or resources? Am I correct in understanding this
I think that Wikimedians should give response on that:
* Writing emails and letters to Italian embassies in your country. (I
will email them immediately.)
* Demonstrate -- 5 people are enough -- in front of embassy in your country.
* If you are in EU country, ask your EU parliament members to talk
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 9:54 AM, Donaldo Papero pap3ri...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Nathan,
my name is Giovanni (Donaldo stands for Donald [Duck], and is related to my
nickname ;))
You are right in understanding that this lock is a way to raise a discussion
about a proposed law, which has been
On 4 October 2011 10:12, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
Reading the discussion (with Google-glasses), it looks like there are
about 40 people in favor of the lock (with only several opposed), and
the lock is planned for sine die or until a decision to unlock it is
taken by the community.
One has to wonder how the community will be able to discuss unlocking the
project if the project is locked.
Risker
i.e., we can leave unlocked the village pump
Jalo
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 3:40 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 9:12 AM, Donaldo Papero pap3ri...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
Here are the facts: the Italian parliament will discuss within few days –
and most likely approve – a law which, among the other things, will
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 10:48 AM, Ilario Valdelli valde...@gmail.com wrote:
The question is that all Internet people in Italy is having strike
because the project of law can be stopped if not approved. If it will
be approved, it's harder to do something.
It means that any action must be done
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 5:01 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 10:48 AM, Ilario Valdelli valde...@gmail.com wrote:
The question is that all Internet people in Italy is having strike
because the project of law can be stopped if not approved. If it will
be approved,
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 16:03, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote:
I think that Wikimedians should give response on that:
* Writing emails and letters to Italian embassies in your country. (I
will email them immediately.)
* Demonstrate -- 5 people are enough -- in front of embassy in your
Hi,
Wikipedia is a promise, that promise is free knowledge at all time. By
locking read access, you break that promise, you destroy part of the
trust that our readers have in Wikipedia.
In order to get the readers attention, it seems equally efficient to me
to have a huge sitenotice, but without
On 4 October 2011 14:12, Donaldo Papero pap3ri...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
Here are the facts: the Italian parliament will discuss within few days –
and most likely approve – a law which, among the other things, will
introduce the duty, for every web site (included, and not limited to,
Does the proposed law say who is responsible for compliance? I would be
surprised if it was anyone other than the WMF. Legally speaking, we're all
just users of the website
Maybe you're right, but it's not so obvious. [Sorry for my english] There is
a lawsuit opened by a person against
Thomas Morton, 04/10/2011 15:23:
In the modern world countries love to try it on and apply their internet
laws across the world. Fortunately courts tend to give that short shrift.
48 h deadline for correction and fines don't need a court; nor does the
police to summon and interrogate a sysop
Much easier to sue under standard defamation laws (which we are under risk
of daily anyway!).
Not at all! In the italian laws, if you bring lawsuit against me for
defamation, you must prove I'm not saying the truth.
With this law you can bring lawsuit against me simply 'cause I've not
A couple of English articles on the new law:
https://www.pcworld.com/article/240840/italian_internet_activists_protest_proposed_law.html
http://www.internetevolution.com/author.asp?section_id=852doc_id=234086
Also, I'm not involved in the strike, but the WMF has been somehow
informed by the
Jalo, 04/10/2011 18:04:
Not at all! In the italian laws, if you bring lawsuit against me for
defamation, you must prove I'm not saying the truth.
Not really: freedom of press/expression is not so broad in Italy,
there's no exceptio veritatis (in short truth is not important) for
diffamazione,
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 14:56, Tomasz Ganicz polime...@gmail.com wrote:
2011/10/4 Thomas Morton morton.tho...@googlemail.com:
I think this is a prime opportunity to point out to those concerned:
Wikipedia is hosted in the US :) so no need to worry!
Are you sure? Contributors lives mainly in
For those not following, Italian Wikipedia went into lockdown a while ago.
All content and pages direct to the notice.
http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Comunicato_4_ottobre_2011
Regards
Theo
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 1:02 AM, Mathias Schindler
mathias.schind...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue,
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 3:37 PM, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote:
For those not following, Italian Wikipedia went into lockdown a while ago.
All content and pages direct to the notice.
http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Comunicato_4_ottobre_2011
Regards
Theo
Any news coverage?
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 1:22 AM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 3:37 PM, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote:
For those not following, Italian Wikipedia went into lockdown a while
ago.
All content and pages direct to the notice.
One in English:
http://www.businessinsider.com/italy-wikipedia-wiretapping-2011-10
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 21:57, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 1:22 AM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 3:37 PM, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote:
For those not
Whoever has locked out access to it.wikipedia.org should be immediately
desysopped under emergency procedures. This site is run by the Wikimedia
Foundation and I've seen no authorization by the WMF for the vandalism of
one of its websites.
___
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 21:58, Aaron Adrignola aaron.adrign...@gmail.com wrote:
Whoever has locked out access to it.wikipedia.org should be immediately
desysopped under emergency procedures. This site is run by the Wikimedia
Foundation and I've seen no authorization by the WMF for the vandalism
1 - 100 of 148 matches
Mail list logo
