Re: [Wikimedia-l] Mexican government signs ACTA

[Cristian Consonni]

2012/7/12 Ivan Martínez :
> Dear all,
>
> The agency that regulates in Mexico the Industrial Property (IMPI) signed
> the ACTA agreement in Japan yesterday. Here's the official press
> release[1].

Bad news =(
Good luck for your actions against ACTA, and please let us now how we
can show our support.

Cristian
p.s.:, Yvay, you may also want to forward this information to ComCom-l.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board resolutions from 11 July 2012 meeting

[Bishakha Datta]

On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 7:14 AM, MZMcBride  wrote:

> However, I don't see any posted resolutions or votes regarding the new
> Board
> appointments (yet). Will those be forthcoming?
>
> Yes.
Bishakha
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

[Wikimedia-l] next Wikidata office hours

[Lydia Pintscher]

Heya folks,

I just wanted to let you know that the next Wikidata office hours will
be on soon. Denny and I will be around on IRC in #wikimedia-wikidata
to answer any question you might have and discuss. Logs will be
published afterwards.

English: July 18 at 22:00 UTC
(http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?hour=22&min=00&sec=0&day=18&month=07&year=2012)
German: July 23 at 16:30 UTC
(http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?hour=16&min=30&sec=0&day=23&month=07&year=2012)


Cheers
Lydia

-- 
Lydia Pintscher - http://about.me/lydia.pintscher
Community Communications for Wikidata

Wikimedia Deutschland e.V.
Obentrautstr. 72
10963 Berlin
www.wikimedia.de

Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V.

Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg
unter der Nummer 23855 Nz. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das
Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation Announces 2012-13 Board of Trustees and Elected Officers at Wikimania in Washington DC

[Erik Moeller]

On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 8:14 PM, phoebe ayers  wrote:
> It has been an honor to be a member of the Board, and I hope you will
> join me in welcoming Alice and Patricio.

Thank you, Phoebe (and Arne!), for your service to the movement! And
thanks to Ting for his work as Chair, and congrats to Kat Walsh for
succeeding him in this role - a most excellent choice.

Like some other volunteer roles, serving on the Board is exhausting
and often thankless, so please know that your tireless efforts are and
have been greatly appreciated :-).

Welcome to Patricio and Alice, whose many prior accomplishments in
Wikimedia speak for themselves.

Erik

-- 
Erik Möller
VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation

Support Free Knowledge: https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board resolutions from 11 July 2012 meeting

[MZMcBride]

Bishakha Datta wrote:
> Please let us know if you have any questions.

Hi.

I updated the following pages:

* https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Board_of_Trustees
* https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Former_Board_of_Trustees_members

I tried to update this page:

* https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/History_of_the_Board_of_Trustees

However, I don't see any posted resolutions or votes regarding the new Board
appointments (yet). Will those be forthcoming?

MZMcBride



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

[Wikimedia-l] Board resolutions from 11 July 2012 meeting

[Bishakha Datta]

Dear all,

Greetings from Wikimania!

At its board meeting on 11 July 2012, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of
Trustees passed the following resolutions:

http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:2012-2013_Annual_Plan

This resolution approves management's proposed 2012-13 annual plan, and
also directs the Executive Director to carry out an assessment of the
Foundation's programs and strategic priorities.

http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Funds_Dissemination_Committee_framework_and_initial_operation

This resolution approves the initial operation and charter of the Funds
Dissemination Committee.

Please let us know if you have any questions.

Best
Bishakha
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation Announces 2012-13 Board of Trustees and Elected Officers at Wikimania in Washington DC

[phoebe ayers]

Dear all,

It has been an honor to be a member of the Board, and I hope you will
join me in welcoming Alice and Patricio.

And, I am very pleased to have Bishakha appointed as the new secretary
-- you can expect to see notes on our meeting coming from her.

Thank you, and see you around the wikis --
Phoebe


On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Matthew Roth  wrote:
> Hello all,
> Please find a press release from the Wikimedia Foundation announcing Board
> of Trustees election results and welcoming Alice Wiegand and Patricio
> Lorente to the Board.
>
> thanks,
> Matthew
>
> --
> Matthew Roth
> Global Communications
> Wikimedia Foundation
>
>
>
> (This release is also posted at
> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Press_releases/WMF_Board_Election_July_2012
> )
>
> *Wikimedia Foundation Announces 2012-13 Board of Trustees and Elected
> Officers at Wikimania in Washington DC*
>
> Washington, DC -- July 12, 2012-- The Wikimedia Foundation today announced
> recent appointments and elected officers for the 2012-13 Board of Trustees.
> Every year at Wikimania, the annual gathering of Wikimedia contributors
> from around the world, the Wikimedia Board appoints its officers for the
> coming year, and this year’s appointments were announced in Washington, DC.
>
> This year, Kat Walsh was appointed Chair of the Board, Jan-Bart de Vreede
> was re-appointed Vice-chair, Stuart West was re-appointed as Board
> Treasurer and Bishaka Dhatta becomes Board Secretary. The Board expressed
> its great thanks to former Board Chair Ting Chen, as well as outgoing
> trustees Arne Klempert and Phoebe Ayers. Their leadership has strengthened
> and nurtured the growth of the worldwide Wikimedia movement.
>
> "I am honored to have been chosen to chair the Board in the coming year,”
> said Kat Walsh, Chairman of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees. “I
> want to thank Ting Chen for his service in his period as Chair, and I look
> forward to working closely with him as I take on this new role. It's an
> important time in the history of the Wikimedia Foundation and the Wikimedia
> movement: I look forward to leading the Board in the year ahead."
>
> “It’s been a pleasure to serve the Wikimedia movement as Chair of the Board
> of Trustees,” said Ting Chen. “Since I took on the role of Chair we’ve
> worked with our global community and the Foundation to introduce an
> ambitious five-year plan to increase the diversity and overall population
> of our community, while also establishing long-term financial plans to
> ensure sustainability for our movement and our projects. Our Board has
> matured and strengthened, and I’m proud of the tireless work of my
> colleagues.”
>
> There are 10 seats on the Board and according to the Foundation's bylaws,
> three members are elected by the Wikimedia community, two are selected by
> the Wikimedia chapters, the Founder seat is held by Jimmy Wales, and four
> members are appointed by the Board itself to provide additional, specific
> expertise.
>
> The Foundation is happy to welcome its two newest members of the Board,
> Patricio Lorente and Alice Wiegand, who were elected to the Board by the
> Wikimedia chapters in May 2012. The chapters seat selection process was
> created in April 2008, in order to demonstrate the Board's commitment to
> the chapters as an important player in the fulfillment of the Wikimedia
> mission.
>
> Patricio Lorente is the former President of Wikimedia Argentina. He has
> worked as Project Manager of the Association for Social Development in
> Argentina and he currently serves as General ProSecretary of the National
> University of La Plata. Alice Wiegand is personal aide to the Mayor of
> Meerbusch, Germany. She has recently begun her Master’s studies in Public
> Policy and Governance.
>
> *The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees for 2012-2013:*
> *Kat Walsh, Board Chair (current term until July 2013)
> *Jan-Bart de Vreede, Vice Chair (current term until December 2013)
> *Stuart West, Treasurer (current term until December 2013)
> *Bishakha Datta, Secretary (current term until December 2012)
> *Jimmy Wales, FounderTing Chen (current term until 2013)
> *Samuel Klein (current term until July 2013)
> *Matt Halprin (current term until December 2012)
> *Alice Wiegand (current term until July 2014)
> *Patricio Lorente (current term until July 2014)
>
> *About Wikimania*
> http://wikimania.org
>
> Wikimania 2012 is being held in Washington, DC, USA, where more than 1000
> Wikipedia contributors, Wikimedia advocates, researchers and educators from
> 87 countries are in attendance. The previous Wikimanias were held in
> Frankfurt, Germany (2005), Cambridge, USA (2006), Taipei, Taiwan (2007),
> Alexandria, Egypt (2008), Buenos Aires, Argentina (2009), Gdańsk, Poland
> (2010), and Haifa, Israel (2011).
>
> *About the Wikimedia Foundation*
> http://wikimediafoundation.org
> http://blog.wikimedia.org
>
> The Wikimedia Foundation is the non-profit organization that operates
> Wikipedia,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation Announces 2012-13 Board of Trustees and Elected Officers at Wikimania in Washington DC

[Mark]

On 7/12/12 10:42 PM, Matthew Roth wrote:

The Board expressed
its great thanks to former Board Chair Ting Chen, as well as outgoing
trustees Arne Klempert and Phoebe Ayers. Their leadership has strengthened
and nurtured the growth of the worldwide Wikimedia movement.


A brief "me too" thanking the outgoing board members for their great 
work. I've on occasion been skeptical of Wikimedia, The Incorporated 
Body (not as a movement or goals, but just in the way I'm skeptical of 
any growing, professionalizing/institutionalizing organization), but I 
think the Board over the past few years has put forth quite a bit of 
effort in making sure numerous stakeholders and goals are represented 
and reconciled. I'm most familiar with Phoebe's tireless work (which is 
truly impressive), but what I know of Arne Klempert's and Ting 
Chen's roles is quite positive as well. So, thanks!


-Mark


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

[Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Wikimedia Foundation announces new Board of Trustees and Elected Officers

[Jay Walsh]

(this press release is posted online at
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Press_releases/WMF_Board_Election_July_2012
)


*Wikimedia Foundation Announces 2012-13 Board of Trustees and Elected
Officers at Wikimania in Washington DC*

*
*

Washington, DC -- July 12, 2012 -- The Wikimedia Foundation today announced
recent appointments and elected officers for the 2012-13 Board of Trustees.
Every year at Wikimania, the annual gathering of Wikimedia contributors
from around the world, the Wikimedia Board appoints its officers for the
coming year, and this year’s appointments were announced in Washington, DC.

This year, Kat Walsh was appointed Chair of the Board, Jan-Bart de Vreede
was re-appointed Vice-chair, Stuart West was re-appointed as Board
Treasurer and Bishaka Dhatta becomes Board Secretary. The Board expressed
its great thanks to former Board Chair Ting Chen, as well as outgoing
trustees Arne Klempert and Phoebe Ayers. Their leadership has strengthened
and nurtured the growth of the worldwide Wikimedia movement.

"I am honored to have been chosen to chair the Board in the coming year,”
said Kat Walsh, Chairman of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees. “I
want to thank Ting Chen for his service in his period as Chair, and I look
forward to working closely with him as I take on this new role. It's an
important time in the history of the Wikimedia Foundation and the Wikimedia
movement: I look forward to leading the Board in the year ahead."

“It’s been a pleasure to serve the Wikimedia movement as Chair of the Board
of Trustees,” said Ting Chen. “Since I took on the role of Chair we’ve
worked with our global community and the Foundation to introduce an
ambitious five-year plan to increase the diversity and overall population
of our community, while also establishing long-term financial plans to
ensure sustainability for our movement and our projects. Our Board has
matured and strengthened, and I’m proud of the tireless work of my
colleagues.”

There are 10 seats on the Board and according to the Foundation's bylaws,
three members are elected by the Wikimedia community, two are selected by
the Wikimedia chapters, the Founder seat is held by Jimmy Wales, and four
members are appointed by the Board itself to provide additional, specific
expertise.

The Foundation is happy to welcome its two newest members of the Board,
Patricio Lorente and Alice Wiegand, who were elected to the Board by the
Wikimedia chapters in May 2012. The chapters seat selection process was
created in April 2008, in order to demonstrate the Board's commitment to
the chapters as an important player in the fulfillment of the Wikimedia
mission.

Patricio Lorente is the former President of Wikimedia Argentina. He has
worked as Project Manager of the Association for Social Development in
Argentina and he currently serves as General ProSecretary of the National
University of La Plata. Alice Wiegand is personal aide to the Mayor of
Meerbusch, Germany. She has recently begun her Master’s studies in Public
Policy and Governance.


*The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees for 2012-2013*


Kat Walsh, Board Chair (current term until July 2013)

Jan-Bart de Vreede, Vice Chair (current term until December 2013)

Stuart West, Treasurer (current term until December 2013)

Bishakha Datta, Secretary (current term until December 2012)

Jimmy Wales, Founder

Ting Chen (current term until 2013)

Samuel Klein (current term until July 2013)

Matt Halprin (current term until December 2012)

Alice Wiegand (current term until July 2014)

Patricio Lorente (current term until July 2014)


*About Wikimania*

http://wikimania.org

Wikimania 2012 is being held in Washington, DC, USA, where more than 1000
Wikipedia contributors, Wikimedia advocates, researchers and educators from
87 countries are in attendance. The previous Wikimanias were held in
Frankfurt, Germany (2005), Cambridge, USA (2006), Taipei, Taiwan (2007),
Alexandria, Egypt (2008), Buenos Aires, Argentina (2009), Gdańsk, Poland
(2010), and Haifa, Israel (2011).


*About the Wikimedia Foundation*

http://wikimediafoundation.org

http://blog.wikimedia.org

The Wikimedia Foundation is the non-profit organization that operates
Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. According to comScore Media Metrix,
Wikipedia and the other projects operated by the Wikimedia Foundation
receive more than 492 million unique visitors per month, making them the
fifth-most popular web property world-wide (comScore, May 2012). Available
in 285 languages, Wikipedia contains more than 22 million articles
contributed by a global volunteer community of more than 85,000 people.
Based in San Francisco, California, the Wikimedia Foundation is an audited,
501(c)(3) charity that is funded primarily through donations and grants.


*Press contact*

Jay Walsh

Head of Communications

Wikimedia Foundation

Tel. +1 415-860-8166

jwa...@wikimedia.org
___
Please note: all replies sent to this mailin

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Russian Wikipedia goes on strike

[Mike Godwin]

On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 11:59 AM, Anthony  wrote:

> Okay.  Is there something in those regs which regulates what WMF "can
> and cannot do politically"?  All I see is regulations stating that WMF
> may be taxed based on what is does.

I'm afraid I don't understand the distinction you're making.

> When you said "Wikimedia Foundation, as a corporation, is profoundly
> regulated in what it can and cannot do politically", I thought you
> were referring to some regulation(s) outside of the internal revenue
> code.  Were you?

No.


--Mike

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

[Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation Announces 2012-13 Board of Trustees and Elected Officers at Wikimania in Washington DC

[Matthew Roth]

Hello all,
Please find a press release from the Wikimedia Foundation announcing Board
of Trustees election results and welcoming Alice Wiegand and Patricio
Lorente to the Board.

thanks,
Matthew

-- 
Matthew Roth
Global Communications
Wikimedia Foundation



(This release is also posted at
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Press_releases/WMF_Board_Election_July_2012
)

*Wikimedia Foundation Announces 2012-13 Board of Trustees and Elected
Officers at Wikimania in Washington DC*

Washington, DC -- July 12, 2012-- The Wikimedia Foundation today announced
recent appointments and elected officers for the 2012-13 Board of Trustees.
Every year at Wikimania, the annual gathering of Wikimedia contributors
from around the world, the Wikimedia Board appoints its officers for the
coming year, and this year’s appointments were announced in Washington, DC.

This year, Kat Walsh was appointed Chair of the Board, Jan-Bart de Vreede
was re-appointed Vice-chair, Stuart West was re-appointed as Board
Treasurer and Bishaka Dhatta becomes Board Secretary. The Board expressed
its great thanks to former Board Chair Ting Chen, as well as outgoing
trustees Arne Klempert and Phoebe Ayers. Their leadership has strengthened
and nurtured the growth of the worldwide Wikimedia movement.

"I am honored to have been chosen to chair the Board in the coming year,”
said Kat Walsh, Chairman of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees. “I
want to thank Ting Chen for his service in his period as Chair, and I look
forward to working closely with him as I take on this new role. It's an
important time in the history of the Wikimedia Foundation and the Wikimedia
movement: I look forward to leading the Board in the year ahead."

“It’s been a pleasure to serve the Wikimedia movement as Chair of the Board
of Trustees,” said Ting Chen. “Since I took on the role of Chair we’ve
worked with our global community and the Foundation to introduce an
ambitious five-year plan to increase the diversity and overall population
of our community, while also establishing long-term financial plans to
ensure sustainability for our movement and our projects. Our Board has
matured and strengthened, and I’m proud of the tireless work of my
colleagues.”

There are 10 seats on the Board and according to the Foundation's bylaws,
three members are elected by the Wikimedia community, two are selected by
the Wikimedia chapters, the Founder seat is held by Jimmy Wales, and four
members are appointed by the Board itself to provide additional, specific
expertise.

The Foundation is happy to welcome its two newest members of the Board,
Patricio Lorente and Alice Wiegand, who were elected to the Board by the
Wikimedia chapters in May 2012. The chapters seat selection process was
created in April 2008, in order to demonstrate the Board's commitment to
the chapters as an important player in the fulfillment of the Wikimedia
mission.

Patricio Lorente is the former President of Wikimedia Argentina. He has
worked as Project Manager of the Association for Social Development in
Argentina and he currently serves as General ProSecretary of the National
University of La Plata. Alice Wiegand is personal aide to the Mayor of
Meerbusch, Germany. She has recently begun her Master’s studies in Public
Policy and Governance.

*The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees for 2012-2013:*
*Kat Walsh, Board Chair (current term until July 2013)
*Jan-Bart de Vreede, Vice Chair (current term until December 2013)
*Stuart West, Treasurer (current term until December 2013)
*Bishakha Datta, Secretary (current term until December 2012)
*Jimmy Wales, FounderTing Chen (current term until 2013)
*Samuel Klein (current term until July 2013)
*Matt Halprin (current term until December 2012)
*Alice Wiegand (current term until July 2014)
*Patricio Lorente (current term until July 2014)

*About Wikimania*
http://wikimania.org

Wikimania 2012 is being held in Washington, DC, USA, where more than 1000
Wikipedia contributors, Wikimedia advocates, researchers and educators from
87 countries are in attendance. The previous Wikimanias were held in
Frankfurt, Germany (2005), Cambridge, USA (2006), Taipei, Taiwan (2007),
Alexandria, Egypt (2008), Buenos Aires, Argentina (2009), Gdańsk, Poland
(2010), and Haifa, Israel (2011).

*About the Wikimedia Foundation*
http://wikimediafoundation.org
http://blog.wikimedia.org

The Wikimedia Foundation is the non-profit organization that operates
Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. According to comScore Media Metrix,
Wikipedia and the other projects operated by the Wikimedia Foundation
receive more than 492 million unique visitors per month, making them the
fifth-most popular web property world-wide (comScore, May 2012). Available
in 285 languages, Wikipedia contains more than 22 million articles
contributed by a global volunteer community of more than 85,000 people.
Based in San Francisco, California, the Wikimedia Foundation is an audited,
501(c)(3) charity that is funded primarily throu

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Russian Wikipedia goes on strike

[Anthony]

On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 2:41 PM, Mike Godwin  wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 11:34 AM, Anthony  wrote:
>
>>> So? I gave you pointers to regs for 501(c)(3), (c)(4), etc.
>>
>> Well, no, you didn't.
>
> I think most people will agree that I did give you pointers to the
> regs. I agree that I did not give you direct links to the regs.

Okay.  Is there something in those regs which regulates what WMF "can
and cannot do politically"?  All I see is regulations stating that WMF
may be taxed based on what is does.

When you said "Wikimedia Foundation, as a corporation, is profoundly
regulated in what it can and cannot do politically", I thought you
were referring to some regulation(s) outside of the internal revenue
code.  Were you?

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Russian Wikipedia goes on strike

[Nathan]

Or maybe you should both agree to take this into at least another thread,
or preferably off-list altogether.

On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 2:52 PM, Anthony  wrote:

> On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 2:41 PM, Mike Godwin  wrote:
> > I didn't see much point in rereading those provisions, because I
> > didn't understand what exactly you were taking issue with me on. I'm
> > not sure anyone else does either. Perhaps someone else could explain
> > your disagreement with me, because I'm drawing a blank here in what
> > I'm reading from you.
>
> If you can't figure out how I disagree with you, maybe you should
> conclude that I'm not disagreeing with you.
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Russian Wikipedia goes on strike

[Anthony]

On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 2:41 PM, Mike Godwin  wrote:
> I didn't see much point in rereading those provisions, because I
> didn't understand what exactly you were taking issue with me on. I'm
> not sure anyone else does either. Perhaps someone else could explain
> your disagreement with me, because I'm drawing a blank here in what
> I'm reading from you.

If you can't figure out how I disagree with you, maybe you should
conclude that I'm not disagreeing with you.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Russian Wikipedia goes on strike

[Mike Godwin]

On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 11:34 AM, Anthony  wrote:

>> So? I gave you pointers to regs for 501(c)(3), (c)(4), etc.
>
> Well, no, you didn't.

I think most people will agree that I did give you pointers to the
regs. I agree that I did not give you direct links to the regs.
Perhaps you understood "pointers" to mean "direct links."

> I also explained to you that IRC 501(c)(3) does not prohibit certain
> corporations from performing certain actions, rather it *defines*
> certain corporations which do not perform certain actions.

This is all lovely, but I am still unclear as to what you believe you
are disagreeing with me about.

> I figured
> you would confirm this by reading the code.

I didn't see much point in rereading those provisions, because I
didn't understand what exactly you were taking issue with me on. I'm
not sure anyone else does either. Perhaps someone else could explain
your disagreement with me, because I'm drawing a blank here in what
I'm reading from you.

>> What this has to do with WMF or the Russian-language Wikimedians'
>> activism is still beyond me, however.
>
> Nothing.  My comment was about a proposed constitutional amendment to
> overturn Citizen United, and I gave that as an example of something
> that is even more important than PIPA for Wikipedians to protest.

Why Wikipedians in particular? Citizens United (not "Citizen United")
has to do with campaign expenditures. So far as I know, neither WMF
nor Wikimedians have any interest, one way or the other, in attempts
to regulate campaign expenditures, or constitutional amendments
regarding same.


--Mike

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Russian Wikipedia goes on strike

[Anthony]

>>> 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.

Well, no, you didn't.  But I know where the regulations for 501(c)(3),
(c)(4), etc. are, since dealing with treasury regulations is what I do
for a living.

I also explained to you that IRC 501(c)(3) does not prohibit certain
corporations from performing certain actions, rather it *defines*
certain corporations which do not perform certain actions.  I figured
you would confirm this by reading the code.  However, I'll quote it
for you.  First, I'll quote 501(a):

"An organization described in subsection (c) or (d) orsection 401 (a)
shall be exempt from taxation under this subtitle unless such
exemption is denied under section 502 or 503."

Now, the beginning of 501(c):

"The following organizations are referred to in subsection (a):"

And now, 501(c)(3)

"Corporations, and any community chest, fund, or foundation, organized
and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific,
testing for public safety, literary, or educational purposes, or to
foster national or international amateur sports competition (but only
if no part of its activities involve the provision of athletic
facilities or equipment), or for the prevention of cruelty to children
or animals, no part of the net earnings of which inures to the benefit
of any private shareholder or individual, no substantial part of the
activities of which is carrying on propaganda, or otherwise
attempting, to influence legislation (except as otherwise provided in
subsection (h)), and which does not participate in, or intervene in
(including the publishing or distributing of statements), any
political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate
for public office."

The code doesn't say that 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from
intervening in political campaigns, rather it says that organizations
which intervene in political campaigns *are not 501(c)(3)
organizations*.

As you will know if you've read the recent court cases, there is a
difference between prohibiting an action, and subjecting it to certain
taxes.

>>> 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.

Nothing.  My comment was about a proposed constitutional amendment to
overturn Citizen United, and I gave that as an example of something
that is even more important than PIPA for Wikipedians to protest.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Russian Wikipedia goes on strike

[Milos Rancic]

On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 7:34 PM, Nathan  wrote:
> Is there a "service provider" exemption for entities like Wikimedia in
> Russia? Is it possible that making the Russian Wikipedia inaccessible for a
> period in order to protest a Russian law might be considered political
> activism in Russia? I don't believe the WMF itself has any assets in
> Russia, but it seems like that wouldn't prevent the Russian authorities
> from taking steps against the Foundation if the Russian Wikipedia community
> decides to take steps like this again.

Like in SOPA/PIPA and ACTA cases, objecting to the law is socially too
wide to be considered as political activism in narrow sense. Yandex,
Russian biggest search engine, is among those opposing the law.

> What about other countries? If the Arabic Wikipedia decides to protest laws
> in Saudi Arabia or Egypt, or the Chinese Wikipedia against the PRC, etc.,
> has anyone at the Foundation evaluated if there are any risks involved or
> potential repercussions?

In one email from this thread similar attitude was applied to the
hypothetical decision "Russian Wikipedia for Russians".

In short, the attitude is false excuse for vanguardism.

The first case has been based on the fact that Wikipedians from Russia
would like to articulate Wikipedia block for Russia and that they have
no means to do that, except to block Russian Wikipedia for the whole
world (which should be done by WMF).

Anyway, I don't think that anything of the written would happen:
* Every big Wikipedian community has enough collective responsibility
not to act ethnocentrically. Thus, it's false premise that something
like that would pass on Russian Wikipedia.
* Wikipedia is far from being important in China. Thus, going on
strike there wouldn't be productive. And Chinese Wikipedians know
that.
* Arabic Wikipedians come from many [Arabic] countries and there
should be something *really* heavy to see them united in desire to
strike.

Quite opposite, the threats of SOPA, PIPA, ACTA, Italian and Russian
laws are by far more visible than anything mentioned above.

The logic is similar to building bulwarks in a desert because sea
level will raise in few hundreds of years. If you live there, you need
water now.

More realistically, *if* something like that happens, please think and
act if necessary. The fact that the distance between Washington DC and
Rome is smaller than distance between Washington DC and Moscow doesn't
mean that Wikipedia strikes will finish in Pyongyang.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Russian Wikipedia goes on strike

[Mike Godwin]

On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 10:08 AM, Anthony  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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Russian Wikipedia goes on strike

[Andreas Kolbe]

On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 12:35 AM, Tim Starling wrote:

> On 11/07/12 00:32, David Gerard wrote:
> > On 10 July 2012 15:29, Tim Starling  wrote:
> >
> >> SOPA didn't threaten the existence of Wikipedia,
> >
> >
> > Geoff Brigham opined otherwise, IIRC.
>
> Yes, on the basis that "Wikipedia arguably falls under the definition
> of an 'Internet search engine'".
>
> <
> http://blog.wikimedia.org/2011/12/13/how-sopa-will-hurt-the-free-web-and-wikipedia/
> >
>
> The definition was:
>
> "The term ‘Internet search engine’ means a service made available via
> the Internet that searches, crawls, categorizes, or indexes
> information or Web sites available elsewhere on the Internet and on
> the basis of a user query or selection that consists of terms,
> concepts, categories, questions, or other data returns to the user a
> means, such as a hyperlinked list of Uniform Resource Locators, of
> locating, viewing, or downloading such information or data available
> on the Internet relating to such query or selection."
>
> http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/hr3261/text
>
> It's hard to see how Wikipedia could fall under this definition, but
> even if it did, what would be the consequences?
>
> "A provider of an Internet search engine shall take technically
> feasible and reasonable measures, as expeditiously as possible, but in
> any case within 5 days after being served with a copy of the order, or
> within such time as the court may order, designed to prevent the
> foreign infringing site that is subject to the order, or a portion of
> such site specified in the order, from being served as a direct
> hypertext link."
>
> Geoff argued that we would have to manually review millions of links
> in order to comply with such a court order. But the definition of an
> "internet site" that would be specified under such a court order is:
>
> "[T]he collection of digital assets, including links, indexes, or
> pointers to digital assets, accessible through the Internet that are
> addressed relative to a common domain name or, if there is no domain
> name, a common Internet Protocol address."
>
> We already index external links by domain name or IP address for easy
> searching, and we have the ability to prevent further such links from
> being submitted, for the purposes of spam control. The compliance cost
> would be no worse than a typical [[WP:RSPAM]] report.
>
> Maybe SOPA was a "serious threat to freedom of expression on the
> Internet", and worth fighting against, but it wasn't a threat to
> Wikipedia's existence.
>
> -- Tim Starling



Thank you. Well said.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Russian Wikipedia goes on strike

[Yaroslav M. Blanter]

On Thu, 12 Jul 2012 13:34:46 -0400, Nathan wrote:
Is there a "service provider" exemption for entities like Wikimedia 
in

Russia?


Not that I know of.

Is it possible that making the Russian Wikipedia inaccessible for a
period in order to protest a Russian law might be considered 
political

activism in Russia?


Legally, no, it is not political activism. From the point of view of 
having good relation with the authorities, this, of course, complicates 
things.


I don't believe the WMF itself has any assets in
Russia, but it seems like that wouldn't prevent the Russian 
authorities
from taking steps against the Foundation if the Russian Wikipedia 
community

decides to take steps like this again.



Formally, they can shut down access to Russian Wikipedia on November 1. 
In reality, I doubt very much they are going to do it. I do not see what 
they can gain, and the public opinion, however weak, will not approve 
it.


What about other countries? If the Arabic Wikipedia decides to 
protest laws
in Saudi Arabia or Egypt, or the Chinese Wikipedia against the PRC, 
etc.,
has anyone at the Foundation evaluated if there are any risks 
involved or

potential repercussions?


I guess in this case nobody asked the Foundation beforehand. And I 
think the fact that nobody from wm.ru cared to show up here to provide 
info and answer questions (Victoria and myself are not members and none 
of us is a Russian resident, though I am a Russian citizen and was 
flying from Russia just last weekend) is in my opinion very illustrative 
in this respect.


But indeed a good question is would it be for instance a good idea to 
blackout Chinese Wikipedia to protest the firewall. My opinion is no. It 
would expose a number of people to immediate danger without any obviousl 
benefits, since the probability that the blackout can change anything is 
increasingly low.


Cheers
Yaroslav

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Russian Wikipedia goes on strike

[Nathan]

Is there a "service provider" exemption for entities like Wikimedia in
Russia? Is it possible that making the Russian Wikipedia inaccessible for a
period in order to protest a Russian law might be considered political
activism in Russia? I don't believe the WMF itself has any assets in
Russia, but it seems like that wouldn't prevent the Russian authorities
from taking steps against the Foundation if the Russian Wikipedia community
decides to take steps like this again.

What about other countries? If the Arabic Wikipedia decides to protest laws
in Saudi Arabia or Egypt, or the Chinese Wikipedia against the PRC, etc.,
has anyone at the Foundation evaluated if there are any risks involved or
potential repercussions?
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Travel Guide

[Arne Klempert]

We're down in the lobby now.
Am 12.07.2012 12:18 schrieb "aude" :

> On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 12:06 PM, Arne Klempert  >wrote:
>
> > Hi James, where exactly are we going to meet? Arne
> >
>
> Is it too hot or would the terrace be okay?
>
> Cheers,
> Katie
>
>
>
> > Am 12.07.2012 07:54 schrieb "James Heilman" :
> >
> > > A travel guide discussion will be taking place today at Wikimania
> during
> > > lunch. Representatives from Wikivoyage and from the editor community of
> > > WIkitravel will be hear to answer any questions. A request for comment
> is
> > > ongoing
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Travel_Guide
> > >
> > > --
> > > James Heilman
> > > MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
> > >
> > > The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
> > > www.opentextbookofmedicine.com
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list
> > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> > >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list
> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Board member, Wikimedia District of Columbia
> http://wikimediadc.org
> @wikimediadc / @wikimania2012
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Travel meeting

[Arne Klempert]

So, we're here in Front of the lunch room. Arne
Am 12.07.2012 12:26 schrieb "James Heilman" :

> We will be meeting in the main lunch room.
>
> --
> James Heilman
> MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
>
> The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
> www.opentextbookofmedicine.com
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Russian Wikipedia goes on strike

[Anthony]

On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 12:45 PM, Mike Godwin  wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 9:19 AM, Anthony  wrote:
>> First of all, you selectively quoted me, cutting out the part where I
>> made it obvious that I was talking about regulations that apply to
>> corporations in general.  I specifically pointed out that there are
>> regulations which apply to 501(c)(3) organizations.
>
> I hadn't understood you to be talking also about for-profit
> corporations such as The New York Times Company, which (if you happen
> to read the Times) you may know sometimes tries to affect the outcome
> of elections.

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.

> 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.

>> If you prohibit corporations from attempting to influence an election,
>> what's the big leap from prohibiting them from attempting to influence
>> legislation?
>
> 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.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Russian Wikipedia goes on strike

[Theo10011]

Hi Mike

On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 10:18 PM, Mike Godwin  wrote:

> '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). And I wouldn't want to
> prohibit The New York Times Company from political speech regarding
> legislation or policy.'


There's 2 things here, perhaps you are choosing an odd example here, a very
well-reputed newspaper without demarcating it with the corporation that
owns and publishes it. I believe the New York Times's editorial board has
been making endorsements of political candidates since 1850, starting with
Abraham Lincoln[1]. As far as I know, it is the newspaper and an editorial
board that made that endorsement, not the corporation.

But anyway, whether you are comfortable or not with The New York times
Company influencing the outcome of an election, might be colored by your
political leanings. The same analogy could be used for Fox News for
example, though I'm not sure how comfortable that would make everyone else.

I suppose there is another argument to be made here, about Media
endorsements on its own and unregulated money being used to buy Media and
such endorsements, but I shall leave that out for now.

Regards
Theo

[1]
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2008/10/23/opinion/20081024-endorse.html
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Russian Wikipedia goes on strike

[Mike Godwin]

I wrote:

'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.'

That paragraph got truncated through an editing error.

What I meant to write was this:

'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). And I wouldn't want to
prohibit The New York Times Company from political speech regarding
legislation or policy.'


--Mike

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Russian Wikipedia goes on strike

[Mike Godwin]

On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 9:19 AM, Anthony  wrote:

>> Analytically, however, the issue raised by Citizens United is not
>> simply an issue of free speech. It centers on the precise question of
>> what role corporate expenditures can play in elections.
>
> The law in question was with respect to "electioneering
> communications", which the court held was speech.

If you are expressing a disagreement with my characterization of the
issue in Citizens United, I'm unclear what that disagreement is.

> "Political activity" is awfully broad.  The ruling was primarily
> concerned with political speech.

That's imprecise. The case centered on the scope of Congress's power
to regulate speech aimed at affecting elections.

> First of all, you selectively quoted me, cutting out the part where I
> made it obvious that I was talking about regulations that apply to
> corporations in general.  I specifically pointed out that there are
> regulations which apply to 501(c)(3) organizations.

I hadn't understood you to be talking also about for-profit
corporations such as The New York Times Company, which (if you happen
to read the Times) you may know sometimes tries to affect the outcome
of elections.

As for WMF's tax status, I'm not going to talk about that -- I simply
pointed out that 501(c) organizations are regulated.

> If you prohibit corporations from attempting to influence an election,
> what's the big leap from prohibiting them from attempting to influence
> legislation?

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.


--Mike

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

[Wikimedia-l] Mexican government signs ACTA

[Ivan Martínez]

Dear all,

The agency that regulates in Mexico the Industrial Property (IMPI) signed
the ACTA agreement in Japan yesterday. Here's the official press
release[1].

In July 2011, a plural working group (composed of senators, experts,
enthusiasts and academics) had warned the risks of ACTA for Internet
freedom in our country, and exhorted the federal government to not sign
it. Even last week the European Parliament was rejected the same agreement.

The next step is to put pressure on Mexico to the Senate not to approve the
reform, due to the conclusions reached last year with the plural working
group.

We're taking actions as a local chapter, and asking that the community of
Wikipedia in Spanish to put an informative banner. We hope that these
actions can be supported and disseminated by the Wikimedia movement.

[1] (In spanish, press release by IMPI)
http://www.impi.gob.mx/work/sites/IMPI/resources/LocalContent/3388/4/IMPI_010_2012.pdf
[2] (In spanish, Conclusions of the plural working group)
http://www.senado.gob.mx/comisiones/LX/grupo_acta/content/docs/20julio11.pdf

-- 
*Atentamente:

Iván Martínez
Coordinador General
Wikimedia México
mx.wikimedia.org

Imagina un mundo en donde cada persona del planeta pueda tener acceso libre
a la suma total del conocimiento humano.
Eso es lo que estamos haciendo . *
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

[Wikimedia-l] Travel meeting

[James Heilman]

We will be meeting in the main lunch room.

-- 
James Heilman
MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian

The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
www.opentextbookofmedicine.com
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Russian Wikipedia goes on strike

[Anthony]

On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 11:16 AM, Mike Godwin  wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 6:38 AM, Anthony  wrote:
>
>>> I'm not speaking for WMF, but I don't see the connection here.
>>
>> The connection is free speech.
>
> Analytically, however, the issue raised by Citizens United is not
> simply an issue of free speech. It centers on the precise question of
> what role corporate expenditures can play in elections.

The law in question was with respect to "electioneering
communications", which the court held was speech.

> It does not
> address the question of whether corporations can engage in political
> activity.

"Political activity" is awfully broad.  The ruling was primarily
concerned with political speech.

>
>>> Wikimedia Foundation, as a corporation, is profoundly regulated in
>>> what it can and cannot do politically
>>
>> What regulations are you referring to?  Corporations can't *deduct*
>> certain political expenditures.  But what are the profound regulations
>> on what it can do politically?
>
> See, e.g., 
> http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/limits-political-campaigning-501c3-nonprofits-29982.html
> and http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopicl03.pdf.

First of all, you selectively quoted me, cutting out the part where I
made it obvious that I was talking about regulations that apply to
corporations in general.  I specifically pointed out that there are
regulations which apply to 501(c)(3) organizations.

Furthermore, I think it's a bit misleading to say that a 501(c)(3) is
prohibited from engaging in these activities.  IRC 501(c)(3) *defines*
a certain type of organization, which does not engage in certain types
of political activities.  Saying that a 501(c)(3) is prohibited from
engaging in certain political activities is like saying that a virgin
is prohibited from having sex.  If a virgin has sex, they cease to be
a virgin.  If a 501(c)(3) organization engages in "prohibited"
political activities, it ceases to be a 501(c)(3).

> I'm unaware of the Wikimedia Foundation's attempting to influence an
> election.

Surely you understand that one need not be directly affected by the
exact law being challenged to have a great interest in free speech
rights being upheld.

If you prohibit corporations from attempting to influence an election,
what's the big leap from prohibiting them from attempting to influence
legislation?

> But perhaps you're making a one of those "obvious" (excuse me, I mean
> "quite obvious") connections that is too subtle for me to follow.

I guess so.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Travel Guide

[aude]

On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 12:06 PM, Arne Klempert wrote:

> Hi James, where exactly are we going to meet? Arne
>

Is it too hot or would the terrace be okay?

Cheers,
Katie



> Am 12.07.2012 07:54 schrieb "James Heilman" :
>
> > A travel guide discussion will be taking place today at Wikimania during
> > lunch. Representatives from Wikivoyage and from the editor community of
> > WIkitravel will be hear to answer any questions. A request for comment is
> > ongoing http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Travel_Guide
> >
> > --
> > James Heilman
> > MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
> >
> > The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
> > www.opentextbookofmedicine.com
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list
> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>



-- 
Board member, Wikimedia District of Columbia
http://wikimediadc.org
@wikimediadc / @wikimania2012
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Travel Guide

[Arne Klempert]

Hi James, where exactly are we going to meet? Arne
Am 12.07.2012 07:54 schrieb "James Heilman" :

> A travel guide discussion will be taking place today at Wikimania during
> lunch. Representatives from Wikivoyage and from the editor community of
> WIkitravel will be hear to answer any questions. A request for comment is
> ongoing http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Travel_Guide
>
> --
> James Heilman
> MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
>
> The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
> www.opentextbookofmedicine.com
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Russian Wikipedia goes on strike

[Mike Godwin]

On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 6:38 AM, Anthony  wrote:

>> I'm not speaking for WMF, but I don't see the connection here.
>
> The connection is free speech.

Analytically, however, the issue raised by Citizens United is not
simply an issue of free speech. It centers on the precise question of
what role corporate expenditures can play in elections. It does not
address the question of whether corporations can engage in political
activity.

>> Wikimedia Foundation, as a corporation, is profoundly regulated in
>> what it can and cannot do politically
>
> What regulations are you referring to?  Corporations can't *deduct*
> certain political expenditures.  But what are the profound regulations
> on what it can do politically?

See, e.g., 
http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/limits-political-campaigning-501c3-nonprofits-29982.html
and http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopicl03.pdf.

> WMF is engaging in lobbying, a form of political speech.  In the
> Citizens United decision, "the Court held that the First Amendment
> prohibited the government from restricting independent political
> expenditures by corporations and unions".
>
> The connection is quite obvious.

Not merely obvious but "quite obvious," eh? Well, in the United States
cases like Citizens United and its predecessors center precisely on
election campaigns (including the ways money can be spent on "issue
campaigning" aimed at influencing the outcome of elections of
candidates for public office).

I'm unaware of the Wikimedia Foundation's attempting to influence an
election. I'm also unaware of any how Citizens United applies even
remotely the subject matter of this thread, which I had understood to
center on Russian legislation, not (for example) on a Russian
election.

But perhaps you're making a one of those "obvious" (excuse me, I mean
"quite obvious") connections that is too subtle for me to follow.
Speaking only for myself, I remain cheered by the Russian-language
Wikimedians' activism.


--Mike

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] SOPA, threat or menace (was Russian Wikipedia goes on strike)

[Anthony]

On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 3:00 AM, Seth Finkelstein  wrote:
>> Anthony wrote:
>> Well, it also has to be read keeping in mind that it would be
>> borderline malpractice for him to have stated "if SOPA passes then
>> Wikipedia will be in violation of the law and forced to shut down" -
>> just in case SOPA actually did pass, forcing WMF to argue the exact
>> opposite.
>
> I perceive you've been very fortunate, in not having much experience
> with lawyers. Ponder if a health care mandate is a tax or not, or
> whether Mitt Romney thought it was in the past, or does now.

There's quite a difference between a President, a presidential
candidate, and a general counsel for a corporation.

> Moreover, there's already the problem you see in the argument where he wrote:
>
> "Wikipedia arguably falls under the definition of an "Internet search engine,"
>
> I'm quite sure that if SOPA actually did pass, WMF would then strongly
> argue the exact opposite, that Wikipedia absolutely does not fall
> under definition of an "Internet search engine" (as it is not a site
> "whose primary function is gathering and reporting, ... *indexed
> information* or *web sites* available elsewhere on the Internet")

Well.  1) I think Mr Brigham made a mistake in making a public
statement about this at all; however 2) He used the word "arguably".
If SOPA did (or does) pass, and WMF was charged with violating it
(which, frankly, would probably never happen), then surely they would
argue that Wikipedia is not an Internet search engine.  But not being
something and *arguably* falling under the definition of something,
are not mutually exclusive.

>> Without Citizens United upholding free speech of people who use the
>> assistance of corporations, something like PIPA would be much easier
>> to impose.  And the lobbying currently being done by WMF could very
>> well be outlawed.  The Wikimedia Foundation is, after all, a
>> corporation.
>
> The Wikimedia Foundation's legal issues with lobbying are very far
> from the Citizens United sort of case.

Well, yeah, sure.  And WMF's legal issues with copyright infringement
are very different from the sort of cases that would be prosecuted
under PIPA or a PIPA-like law too.

But if the court in Citizens United had opened the door to restricting
nonprofit organizations from engaging in one type of grassroots
lobbying, I don't see how they could leave the door closed regarding
other types of grassroots lobbying, such as the type which WMF is
engaging in.  And really, I don't see how the could leave the door
closed regarding speech in general involving corporate expenditures.
Political speech is, for good reasons, the type of speech which is
most heavily protected by the First Amendment.

> The primary legal issue for WMF here is its
> tax-exempt status and the restrictions which go along with that. Which,
> sigh, is not to assert that WMF violated any such legal restrictions,
> but only to point out that such legal restrictions will become a
> limiting issue long before any corporations-aren't-people campaign
> finance laws.

Not at all.  501(C)(3) charities are allowed to engage in quite a bit
of grassroots lobbying without losing their tax-exempt status (see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_lobbying#Public_Charity_Lobbying_Law).
 If Citizens United had gone the other way, there would be nothing to
stop Congress from eliminating the ability of corporations to engage
in grassroots lobbying altogether.

>
>> I wonder if the WMF will shut down in protest should one of the
>> proposals to amend the constitution to overturn Citizens United gain
>> traction in Congress.
>
> Well, check if the WMF starts getting large donations from the likes
> of the Koch brothers or Karl Rove's Super PAC :-) .

Well, no...but there is
http://www.infodocket.com/2012/01/03/wikmedia-foundation-hires-dc-lobbying-firm/

And, of course, there is the (grassroots, not direct) lobbying that
WMF has already (visibly) engaged in.  I'm not sure if we'll have any
way to know if they've been involved in any direct lobbying until the
2011-2012 990 comes in.

> Oh, excuse me,
> it would be a community decision based on the extreme danger to
> Wikipedia from such measures (hmm, Wikipedia relies on the US
> Constitution, so anything which amends that COULD KILL WIKIPEDIA!!!).

Right.  Except, well, it doesn't fit in the political persuasion of
most Wikipedians.  Not as strongly as "copyright infringement is not
theft", anyway.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Russian Wikipedia goes on strike

[Anthony]

On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 3:47 AM, Mike Godwin  wrote:
> Anthony writes:
>
> "I wonder if the WMF will shut down in protest should one of the
> proposals to amend the constitution to overturn Citizens United gain
> traction in Congress."
>
> I'm not speaking for WMF, but I don't see the connection here.

The connection is free speech.

> Wikimedia Foundation, as a corporation, is profoundly regulated in
> what it can and cannot do politically

What regulations are you referring to?  Corporations can't *deduct*
certain political expenditures.  But what are the profound regulations
on what it can do politically?

> and is even more regulated by
> virtue of its being a nonprofit corporation (NGO).

More specifically, by its being a 501(C)(3).  I'm not aware of any
regulation imposed by simply being a nonprofit corporation.  And even
other 501(C) corporations, such as 501(C)(4) corporations (like
Citizens United) are fairly unrestricted.

Furthermore, 501(C)(3) is a tax status.  The government isn't saying
that WMF can't be political.  It just isn't allowed certain tax
privileges if it does so more than a certain amount.  And in some
cases it is penalized if it takes the tax advantages first and then
does the actions later.

> There's no Citizens
> United connection with regard to anything being discussed here.

WMF is engaging in lobbying, a form of political speech.  In the
Citizens United decision, "the Court held that the First Amendment
prohibited the government from restricting independent political
expenditures by corporations and unions".

The connection is quite obvious.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] New, lower traffic, announcements only email list for Wikimedia developers

[Federico Leva (Nemo)]

Amir E. Aharoni, 12/07/2012 12:42:

What's needed is a medium to announce important impending technical
changes, which require local changes. [...]

We could just blame the projects for not caring enough, or we could
come up with a more effective solution.


You're right that this is an important problem to address and your 
examples are very good, however I think they're not about a 
communication problem. The example problems you've mentioned are just 
impossible to solve for most wikis whatever communication you have with 
them, because they're too complex; the solution here is to make things 
simpler.
I don't know about right-to-left stuff, but protocol-relative URLs have 
been fixed only with a "central" direct intervention to fix mistakes of 
local wikis (and WMF staffers, even)[1] and RL is helped only by good 
documentation for JS gurus[2] or, on most (helpless) wikis, again by a 
central effort.[3]



We surely need ways to spread the word better and especially
during the "emergencies" such as deploy a mailing list can be the way but
surely it's not good for brainstorming or to gather feedback in a useful way
(compare https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Tech which is lately serving this
purpose, to my surprise I have to say, thanks to the effort of some users).


Thank you, I didn't know that page. I'll try to start following it.

In practice, it's harder to follow a wiki page than a mailing list.
But maybe that's just my own feeling.


Of course the wiki page is not good for announcements, but it's better 
than a mailing list for all the other things you mentioned. If there are 
some committed "maintainers" and/or a working IRC channel ([[Tech]] is 
now tightly connected with the revamped #wikimedia-tech, which would be 
improved by [4]), it can work although all attempts have failed in the 
past.[5]


Nemo

[1] 

[2] 

[3] 
 
or even better things like 
 to reduce 
the codebase to be maintained.

[4] 
[5] Today I've closed two problem report pages, see 



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

[Wikimedia-l] Travel Guide

[James Heilman]

A travel guide discussion will be taking place today at Wikimania during
lunch. Representatives from Wikivoyage and from the editor community of
WIkitravel will be hear to answer any questions. A request for comment is
ongoing http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Travel_Guide

-- 
James Heilman
MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian

The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
www.opentextbookofmedicine.com
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] New, lower traffic, announcements only email list for Wikimedia developers

[Amir E. Aharoni]

2012/7/12 Federico Leva (Nemo) :
> Amir E. Aharoni, 11/07/2012 15:40:
>
>>> And the possible change would be for wikitech-ambassadors to become a
>>> medium-to-high-traffic, plain English, list for discussion between
>>> developers and Wikimedia users, to report issues, share ideas and
>>> provide feedback in unapologetically layman terms. The "Ambassadors"
>>> part also means that users who are on that list will have a role in
>>> disseminating information to their local communities, and reporting
>>> back issues possibly raised on local wikis.
>>
>>
>> It was my initiative about two years ago to start wikitech-ambassadors
>> and that's what I hoped it will become. It didn't, but it's still very
>> much needed.
>
>
> What's needed?

What's needed is a medium to announce important impending technical
changes, which require local changes.

Three simple examples:

1. The move to Resource Loader, which required changes in lots of user scripts.

2. The change of right-to-left text handling in 1.18, which required
changes in lots of styles.

3. The replacement of "secure" URLs by plain "https://"; URLs, which
required changes in lots of URLs in scripts, templates etc.

It's not that these changes aren't announced at all. They are
announced in various ways - sometimes by mass-posting to village
pumps, sometimes by blog posts, sometimes by CentralNotice. But it was
never properly tested to be effective, and the fact is that it isn't,
because the above issues are still not completely fixed in some
projects. Lots of projects don't get the message.

We could just blame the projects for not caring enough, or we could
come up with a more effective solution. I believe that an ambassadors
list is a good solution. I actually don't have very strong arguments
to support this belief; if anyone has better ideas for such a medium,
I'll be very glad to hear them. Maybe a blog dedicated to such
announcements will be better. Maybe a combination of solutions.

Obviously, the tool - mailing list, blog, feed, wiki page - is just
one side of the solution. The most important component is the
commitment of the people at the project. But better technical tools
are supposed to make this commitment easier to carry out.

The above is the most important requirement. A second priority would
be a discussion list for talking about such issues before they become
implemented and deployed. In the beginning they can be combined.

> We surely need ways to spread the word better and especially
> during the "emergencies" such as deploy a mailing list can be the way but
> surely it's not good for brainstorming or to gather feedback in a useful way
> (compare https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Tech which is lately serving this
> purpose, to my surprise I have to say, thanks to the effort of some users).

Thank you, I didn't know that page. I'll try to start following it.

In practice, it's harder to follow a wiki page than a mailing list.
But maybe that's just my own feeling.

--
Amir

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Russian Wikipedia goes on strike

[Thomas Morton]

On 12 July 2012 10:27, David Gerard  wrote:

> On 12 July 2012 08:47, Mike Godwin  wrote:
>
> > At the heart of the Wikipedia/Wikimedia projects' success is
> > democratic action, driven by those who are engaged in the process of
> > promoting, supporting, and maintaining these projects. So my instinct
> > is to believe, respect, and support the Russian-language Wikimedia
> > project activists' decision to demonstrate in an effective way that
> > what we all are working on here is under threat by ill-considered
> > legislation by legacy governmental traditions that are used to having
> > their own top-down way.
>
>
> The worrying thing is not only that we've done this three times in the
> past year, it's that we've had cause to do it three times in the past
> year.
>
>
Oh pish.

Laws like the ones we protested have been created many times over the last
few years (France, UK, etc.) and we've never protested them before.

The change was us, not them.

Tom
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Russian Wikipedia goes on strike

[David Gerard]

On 12 July 2012 08:47, Mike Godwin  wrote:

> At the heart of the Wikipedia/Wikimedia projects' success is
> democratic action, driven by those who are engaged in the process of
> promoting, supporting, and maintaining these projects. So my instinct
> is to believe, respect, and support the Russian-language Wikimedia
> project activists' decision to demonstrate in an effective way that
> what we all are working on here is under threat by ill-considered
> legislation by legacy governmental traditions that are used to having
> their own top-down way.


The worrying thing is not only that we've done this three times in the
past year, it's that we've had cause to do it three times in the past
year.


- d.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] New, lower traffic, announcements only email list for Wikimedia developers

[Federico Leva (Nemo)]

Amir E. Aharoni, 11/07/2012 15:40:

And the possible change would be for wikitech-ambassadors to become a
medium-to-high-traffic, plain English, list for discussion between
developers and Wikimedia users, to report issues, share ideas and
provide feedback in unapologetically layman terms. The "Ambassadors"
part also means that users who are on that list will have a role in
disseminating information to their local communities, and reporting
back issues possibly raised on local wikis.


It was my initiative about two years ago to start wikitech-ambassadors
and that's what I hoped it will become. It didn't, but it's still very
much needed.


What's needed? We surely need ways to spread the word better and 
especially during the "emergencies" such as deploy a mailing list can be 
the way but surely it's not good for brainstorming or to gather feedback 
in a useful way (compare https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Tech which is 
lately serving this purpose, to my surprise I have to say, thanks to the 
effort of some users).


Nemo

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Russian Wikipedia goes on strike

[Mike Godwin]

Anthony writes:

"I wonder if the WMF will shut down in protest should one of the
proposals to amend the constitution to overturn Citizens United gain
traction in Congress."

I'm not speaking for WMF, but I don't see the connection here.
Wikimedia Foundation, as a corporation, is profoundly regulated in
what it can and cannot do politically, and is even more regulated by
virtue of its being a nonprofit corporation (NGO). There's no Citizens
United connection with regard to anything being discussed here.

As is generally known, I favored the English Wikipedia blackout with
regard to SOPA/PIPA, and I also supported the Italian Wikimedians'
earlier blackout, driven by fear of (effectively) similar regulation.

At the heart of the Wikipedia/Wikimedia projects' success is
democratic action, driven by those who are engaged in the process of
promoting, supporting, and maintaining these projects. So my instinct
is to believe, respect, and support the Russian-language Wikimedia
project activists' decision to demonstrate in an effective way that
what we all are working on here is under threat by ill-considered
legislation by legacy governmental traditions that are used to having
their own top-down way.

To my Russian comrades: I am with you.


--Mike

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] SOPA, threat or menace (was Russian Wikipedia goes on strike)

[Seth Finkelstein]

> Anthony wrote:
> Well, it also has to be read keeping in mind that it would be
> borderline malpractice for him to have stated "if SOPA passes then
> Wikipedia will be in violation of the law and forced to shut down" -
> just in case SOPA actually did pass, forcing WMF to argue the exact
> opposite.

I perceive you've been very fortunate, in not having much experience
with lawyers. Ponder if a health care mandate is a tax or not, or
whether Mitt Romney thought it was in the past, or does now.

Moreover, there's already the problem you see in the argument where he wrote:

"Wikipedia arguably falls under the definition of an "Internet search engine,"

I'm quite sure that if SOPA actually did pass, WMF would then strongly
argue the exact opposite, that Wikipedia absolutely does not fall
under definition of an "Internet search engine" (as it is not a site
"whose primary function is gathering and reporting, ... *indexed
information* or *web sites* available elsewhere on the Internet")

> Without Citizens United upholding free speech of people who use the
> assistance of corporations, something like PIPA would be much easier
> to impose.  And the lobbying currently being done by WMF could very
> well be outlawed.  The Wikimedia Foundation is, after all, a
> corporation.

The Wikimedia Foundation's legal issues with lobbying are very far
from the Citizens United sort of case. This all could have happened
before that decision. The primary legal issue for WMF here is its
tax-exempt status and the restrictions which go along with that. Which,
sigh, is not to assert that WMF violated any such legal restrictions,
but only to point out that such legal restrictions will become a
limiting issue long before any corporations-aren't-people campaign
finance laws.

> I wonder if the WMF will shut down in protest should one of the
> proposals to amend the constitution to overturn Citizens United gain
> traction in Congress.

Well, check if the WMF starts getting large donations from the likes
of the Koch brothers or Karl Rove's Super PAC :-) . Oh, excuse me,
it would be a community decision based on the extreme danger to
Wikipedia from such measures (hmm, Wikipedia relies on the US
Constitution, so anything which amends that COULD KILL WIKIPEDIA!!!).

By the way, the Russian law has passed despite the protests:

http://www.voanews.com/content/russian_lawmakers_approve_internet_blacklist_measure/1403276.html

"Russia's lower house of parliament has approved a bill that gives the
government power to blacklist websites containing what officials
consider objectionable material."

There's many dangers for pawns in being deluded they are players.

-- 
Seth Finkelstein  Consulting Programmer  http://sethf.com
Infothought blog - http://sethf.com/infothought/blog/
Interview: http://sethf.com/essays/major/greplaw-interview.php

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l