Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moving the technical infrastructure out of the US

[Antoine Musso]

On 30/09/2020 13:55, Pascal Martin wrote:

Hi all,
Maybe one way in France :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renater
I could contact them if it s possible, and more particularly the criann
he would only charge for electricity.
At the same time this allows to be able to save energy for users who
consult wikipedia in Europe.

https://www.criann.fr/


Hello,

Wikimedia has caches servers located in Amsterdam in the same facility 
of AMSIX which is one of the largest internet exchange point in Europe. 
The caches thus have a very good connectivity with all the major 
internet service provider in Europe (and beyond).


France several exchange points (France-IX, PARIX, SFINX which is 
operated by renater) and possibly others. But to my knowledge none offer 
the same amount of connectivity as AMSIX.


Beside privacy, hosting would have to obey to french laws and the 
copyright laws are entirely different than the one in the USA. On top of 
my mind: there is no such thing as "fair use" and no "freedom of panorama".


Surely laws can be changed by intense lobbying and could I see the use 
case for France to relax some copyrights laws to better accommodate 
hosting.  That could potentially attract a wide range of content that 
are seeking a safe copyright heaven.  But I don't see it happening 
anytime soon and that would require a lot of lobbying by a wide range of 
organizations beside just Wikimedia.



Maybe WMF CEO can try giving a call to french president and see whether 
some arrangement can be made :-]




--
Antoine "hashar" Musso

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moving the technical infrastructure out of the US

[WereSpielChequers]

For many years my part of England used to rely on a radio station based in
Luxembourg. When it comes to potential host countries for Wikimedia there
is a lot to be said for choosing a country that is small enough to rather
like the idea of hosting the world's favourite reference site, even if that
means a few changes to copyright and publishing laws and some upset to
international relations. Somehow I don't see the US, or a country a
thirtieth that size, being overly bothered at ceasing to be the host nation
for an organisation the size of this movement

Norway, Iceland or pretty much any Scandinavian country has a case here,
though Norway and Finland both border Russia, which could be an issue.

Switzerland might work, though their banking industry would make them an
odd host for a site that amongst other things documents the doings of the
rich and powerful. However, like Luxembourg, San Marino, Andorra and
Liechtenstein, they do have that rare advantage of being immune to gunboat
diplomacy.

Ireland and New Zealand are also interesting possibilities, small enough
and independent minded enough that they might see the extra jobs and
international impact as more than worth any aggro.

A sensible way forward would be to write up the specification for such a
location, including the technology - you'd want to connect to a major spine
of the internet; But also the publishing, copyright and libel laws that we
need, and then have the WMF email the business development agencies of the
governments concerned inviting them to express an  interest.

The net result might involve us making a change, for example I would hope
we'd be willing to lose the Fair Use protection of US law in order to find
a more congenial home for the movement.

Regards

WSC


> --
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2020 11:58:22 -0400
> From: Samuel Klein 
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List 
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moving the technical infrastructure out of
> the US
> Message-ID:
> <
> caatu9wllusdklowsxpshmojyvzeqpaiilsweyok+0dzxkew...@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> We should have technical partners in multiple other jurisdictions that
> could help in a crisis, and load bearing infrastructure in at least one of
> them, and a plan for how and when to switch. (The walkthrough of what would
> be needed for a smooth transfer send most important, and useful for general
> reliability planning)
>
> We should also fully support and realize Wikimedia-on-ipfs, similar to what
> the internet archive had been doing. (Santhosh has some excellent ideas
> there)
>
> 
>
> On Wed., Sep. 30, 2020, 5:35 a.m. Dan Garry (Deskana), 
> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 09:49, Erik Moeller  wrote:
> >
> > > I hope that some preliminary contingency plans exist or are being
> > > developed, and I'm sure that the movement-wide debate will widen if
> > > the US continues its downward slide into authoritarianism.
> > >
> >
> > I agree with Erik. Even under the Obama administration, there were
> threats
> > to the existence of the movement, such as SOPA [1] which lead to a
> blackout
> > [2]. One can extrapolate from current events that these threats could
> well
> > get larger and more frequent, rather than smaller and less frequent,
> should
> > someone in the US Government decide to focus their attention on attacking
> > Wikipedia and free knowledge. It would be prudent to create a contingency
> > plan which includes an exploration of other options for a location of
> > operation for the Wikimedia Foundation and/or its servers, with their
> > advantages and disadvantages. I personally wouldn't necessarily advocate
> > for making the plan public; that would be ideal, but I'd be comforted
> > merely to know it exists.
> >
> > On Tue, 29 Sep 2020 at 23:36, Joseph Seddon 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I believe options are going to be explored for sustainability but right
> > now
> > > legally speaking the US is the best jurisdiction for hosting us now and
> > the
> > > foreseeable future.
> > >
> >
> > I agree with this too. For now, the United States remains the best place
> > for the organisation to operate out of, and a move should not be actively
> > considered.
> >
> > Dan
> >
> > [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act
> > [2]:
> >
> >
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_SOPA_and_PIPA#Wikimedia_community
>
>
>
>
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moving the technical infrastructure out of the US

[Peter Southwood]

If things are as bad as that then there should be and might already be an 
offshore backup, possibly more than one, as it is a no-brainer, and I don’t 
think WMF tech management  and the board are stupid, and nor are those who 
would wish to prevent it from happening. But plausible deniability. Cheers, 
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Christophe Henner
Sent: 30 September 2020 23:07
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moving the technical infrastructure out of the US

Hi everyone,

Options to mitigate any risks are numerous, especially when it comes to
content distribution (private/semi-private/public/delegated/federated/a mix
of everything) but given the current context I would restrain from having
this as a public / community discussion.

We, community members, would most probably have great inputs but when one
is dealing with this kind of topic, designing contingencies plan, one has
to be ful of what information can be public. I have no idea whether staff
is working on such a topic, and it is better that way.

But we, as community members and awesome human beings, must be mindful of
some things:

   - The people in charge of that topic are mostly US Citizens. The current
   political and social climate is most probably draining their energy.
   Imagine having to manage it both from a personal and professional
   standpoint. Top that doing it for something as important as our projects.
   We cannot fathom their anxiety levels and should not add any to it.
   - Sending email about this topic, they have to read it. They most
   probably have to discuss, debate and balance whether they should answer or
   not. Imagine adding that to the first point.
   - They know for a fact, remember a lot of community members are staff,
   that community could be helping. But they can't ask for it.
   - Top all of that with them knowing that whatever course of action they
   might pick, it comes with a toll. Whether it is to talk about it here, and
   perhaps hinder their efforts, or not talk about it here and be perceived as
   ignoring the community.
   - Top all of that with the stress of trying to do their job in a global
   pandemic situation that might have them with loved ones at risk. Or with
   the need to care daily for young / elderly people.
   - Top that with the fact that they most probably all have relatives that
   at best are in financial struggle, or health struggles or are managing with
   the loss of loved ones.

Take a pause. Try to step in that space. Imagine how you would feel.
Multiply that by a hundred.

I would recommend we (community members) restrain from talking about it.
Perhaps what could be helpful, I am saying could, is for the people that do
actually have knowledge on those topics to just say they are available to
help if needs be with your area of expertise.

If no one at the Foundation acknowledges this thread or your emails, it is
ok. It doesn't mean you are not valued, it means that you are being spared
from that weight. We can provide support, but we should be mindful not to
increase their current level of stress.

Please all take care of yourselves, loved ones and each other

PS: I said staff, but read it as "anyone with an official Wikimedia
Foundation capacity". I know for a fact how those situations can be hard to
manage when you are a volunteer board member in the shadow too.


--
Christophe


On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 21:32, Steven Walling 
wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 12:22 PM Nathan  wrote:
>
> > Well, to Steven's point that you might need a jurisdiction where
> corporate
> > officers and employees aren't subject to extradition... I believe Germany
> > does in fact have an extradition treaty with the United States.
> >
>
> The chapters do seem like the obvious potentially viable easy
> solution here, if WMF set up that contingency plan.
>
> For instance, if WMDE did take over in an emergency, then the critical
> difference is that Germany doesn't extradite its own citizens to the US. So
> there'd just have to be a complete handoff of primary hosting to outside
> the US and some kind of agreement for WMDE (or pick your chapter) to take
> over operational control. There's probably a lot that real lawyers, of
> which I am not one, would know better here.
>
>
> > So far the criteria I'm hearing from the comments here:
> >
> > 1) Politically stable
> > 2) Liberal political environment
> > 3) Strong protections against government interference in relevant
> > operations
> > 4) Section 230-like protection against liability for user content
> > 5) No natural disasters like fires, floods, hurricanes, volcanoes, etc.
> > 6) Strong technological sophistication - preferably a robust technology
> > industry that can supply local talent fo

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moving the technical infrastructure out of the US

[Christophe Henner]

Hi everyone,

Options to mitigate any risks are numerous, especially when it comes to
content distribution (private/semi-private/public/delegated/federated/a mix
of everything) but given the current context I would restrain from having
this as a public / community discussion.

We, community members, would most probably have great inputs but when one
is dealing with this kind of topic, designing contingencies plan, one has
to be ful of what information can be public. I have no idea whether staff
is working on such a topic, and it is better that way.

But we, as community members and awesome human beings, must be mindful of
some things:

   - The people in charge of that topic are mostly US Citizens. The current
   political and social climate is most probably draining their energy.
   Imagine having to manage it both from a personal and professional
   standpoint. Top that doing it for something as important as our projects.
   We cannot fathom their anxiety levels and should not add any to it.
   - Sending email about this topic, they have to read it. They most
   probably have to discuss, debate and balance whether they should answer or
   not. Imagine adding that to the first point.
   - They know for a fact, remember a lot of community members are staff,
   that community could be helping. But they can't ask for it.
   - Top all of that with them knowing that whatever course of action they
   might pick, it comes with a toll. Whether it is to talk about it here, and
   perhaps hinder their efforts, or not talk about it here and be perceived as
   ignoring the community.
   - Top all of that with the stress of trying to do their job in a global
   pandemic situation that might have them with loved ones at risk. Or with
   the need to care daily for young / elderly people.
   - Top that with the fact that they most probably all have relatives that
   at best are in financial struggle, or health struggles or are managing with
   the loss of loved ones.

Take a pause. Try to step in that space. Imagine how you would feel.
Multiply that by a hundred.

I would recommend we (community members) restrain from talking about it.
Perhaps what could be helpful, I am saying could, is for the people that do
actually have knowledge on those topics to just say they are available to
help if needs be with your area of expertise.

If no one at the Foundation acknowledges this thread or your emails, it is
ok. It doesn't mean you are not valued, it means that you are being spared
from that weight. We can provide support, but we should be mindful not to
increase their current level of stress.

Please all take care of yourselves, loved ones and each other

PS: I said staff, but read it as "anyone with an official Wikimedia
Foundation capacity". I know for a fact how those situations can be hard to
manage when you are a volunteer board member in the shadow too.


--
Christophe


On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 21:32, Steven Walling 
wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 12:22 PM Nathan  wrote:
>
> > Well, to Steven's point that you might need a jurisdiction where
> corporate
> > officers and employees aren't subject to extradition... I believe Germany
> > does in fact have an extradition treaty with the United States.
> >
>
> The chapters do seem like the obvious potentially viable easy
> solution here, if WMF set up that contingency plan.
>
> For instance, if WMDE did take over in an emergency, then the critical
> difference is that Germany doesn't extradite its own citizens to the US. So
> there'd just have to be a complete handoff of primary hosting to outside
> the US and some kind of agreement for WMDE (or pick your chapter) to take
> over operational control. There's probably a lot that real lawyers, of
> which I am not one, would know better here.
>
>
> > So far the criteria I'm hearing from the comments here:
> >
> > 1) Politically stable
> > 2) Liberal political environment
> > 3) Strong protections against government interference in relevant
> > operations
> > 4) Section 230-like protection against liability for user content
> > 5) No natural disasters like fires, floods, hurricanes, volcanoes, etc.
> > 6) Strong technological sophistication - preferably a robust technology
> > industry that can supply local talent for WMF needs
> > 7) Protections in the law for data privacy
> > 8) Availability of renewable energy sources and other resources that
> allow
> > for operation of the WMF with a low climate impact
> > 9) Tax exemption or beneficial tax structure for receiving international
> > fundings by donation
> > 10) Clear and reliable regulatory framework for a charitable organization
> > 11) Safe - low crime, low-risk of violence for WMF stakeholders and
> > community
> > 12) Free from risk of extradition to the U.S. or other jurisdictions
> where
> > criminal or civil law might be used against WMF officers or employees
> >
> > I would guess the list of countries that meet all of these criteria might
> > be short. Norway might 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moving the technical infrastructure out of the US

[Steven Walling]

On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 12:22 PM Nathan  wrote:

> Well, to Steven's point that you might need a jurisdiction where corporate
> officers and employees aren't subject to extradition... I believe Germany
> does in fact have an extradition treaty with the United States.
>

The chapters do seem like the obvious potentially viable easy
solution here, if WMF set up that contingency plan.

For instance, if WMDE did take over in an emergency, then the critical
difference is that Germany doesn't extradite its own citizens to the US. So
there'd just have to be a complete handoff of primary hosting to outside
the US and some kind of agreement for WMDE (or pick your chapter) to take
over operational control. There's probably a lot that real lawyers, of
which I am not one, would know better here.


> So far the criteria I'm hearing from the comments here:
>
> 1) Politically stable
> 2) Liberal political environment
> 3) Strong protections against government interference in relevant
> operations
> 4) Section 230-like protection against liability for user content
> 5) No natural disasters like fires, floods, hurricanes, volcanoes, etc.
> 6) Strong technological sophistication - preferably a robust technology
> industry that can supply local talent for WMF needs
> 7) Protections in the law for data privacy
> 8) Availability of renewable energy sources and other resources that allow
> for operation of the WMF with a low climate impact
> 9) Tax exemption or beneficial tax structure for receiving international
> fundings by donation
> 10) Clear and reliable regulatory framework for a charitable organization
> 11) Safe - low crime, low-risk of violence for WMF stakeholders and
> community
> 12) Free from risk of extradition to the U.S. or other jurisdictions where
> criminal or civil law might be used against WMF officers or employees
>
> I would guess the list of countries that meet all of these criteria might
> be short. Norway might hit most of these except the last.
>

The only item that seems more or less impossible is preventing 5 in light
of the impacts of climate change. There is no locale on the planet that
won't suffer from severe weather and natural disasters, just some (like the
poorer countries and anywhere in the tropics) that will see worse impacts.
So the only nuance is aiming for more like "Prepared for the event of
severe weather and natural disasters" not "none".

On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 2:44 PM Michael Peel  wrote:
>
> > … hence the existence of Wikimedia chapters? I suspect at least WMDE
> could
> > take this on if it becomes necessary, although other chapters aren’t as
> > technologically developed as I’d have liked to have seen.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Mike
> >
> > > On 30 Sep 2020, at 19:35, Steven Walling 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > SJ hinted at a related problem which is that we'd also need a backup
> > > organizational structure to run things operationally and legally. If
> the
> > US
> > > becomes so politically unstable that hosting Wikimedia data is under
> > threat
> > > there, just moving the data would not be enough. You'd also have to
> > include
> > > a contingency plan that foresaw the need to legally operate the
> > Foundation
> > > (or an equivalent organization anyway) under a different jurisdiction
> > > with corporate officers not subject to US law or extradition. If the
> > > servers are hosted in the EU but the legally controlling body and its
> > > employees are within the US, you could still see them legally forced to
> > > comply with an order, just like companies are forced to do so in
> > > other countries with censorious regimes today.
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 8:59 AM Samuel Klein 
> wrote:
> > >
> > >> We should have technical partners in multiple other jurisdictions that
> > >> could help in a crisis, and load bearing infrastructure in at least
> one
> > of
> > >> them, and a plan for how and when to switch. (The walkthrough of what
> > would
> > >> be needed for a smooth transfer send most important, and useful for
> > general
> > >> reliability planning)
> > >>
> > >> We should also fully support and realize Wikimedia-on-ipfs, similar to
> > what
> > >> the internet archive had been doing. (Santhosh has some excellent
> ideas
> > >> there)
> > >>
> > >> 
> > >>
> > >> On Wed., Sep. 30, 2020, 5:35 a.m. Dan Garry (Deskana), <
> > djgw...@gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 09:49, Erik Moeller 
> > wrote:
> > >>>
> >  I hope that some preliminary contingency plans exist or are being
> >  developed, and I'm sure that the movement-wide debate will widen if
> >  the US continues its downward slide into authoritarianism.
> > 
> > >>>
> > >>> I agree with Erik. Even under the Obama administration, there were
> > >> threats
> > >>> to the existence of the movement, such as SOPA [1] which lead to a
> > >> blackout
> > >>> [2]. One can extrapolate from current events that these threats could
> > >> well
> > >>> get larger and more 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moving the technical infrastructure out of the US

[Nathan]

Well, to Steven's point that you might need a jurisdiction where corporate
officers and employees aren't subject to extradition... I believe Germany
does in fact have an extradition treaty with the United States.

So far the criteria I'm hearing from the comments here:

1) Politically stable
2) Liberal political environment
3) Strong protections against government interference in relevant operations
4) Section 230-like protection against liability for user content
5) No natural disasters like fires, floods, hurricanes, volcanoes, etc.
6) Strong technological sophistication - preferably a robust technology
industry that can supply local talent for WMF needs
7) Protections in the law for data privacy
8) Availability of renewable energy sources and other resources that allow
for operation of the WMF with a low climate impact
9) Tax exemption or beneficial tax structure for receiving international
fundings by donation
10) Clear and reliable regulatory framework for a charitable organization
11) Safe - low crime, low-risk of violence for WMF stakeholders and
community
12) Free from risk of extradition to the U.S. or other jurisdictions where
criminal or civil law might be used against WMF officers or employees

I would guess the list of countries that meet all of these criteria might
be short. Norway might hit most of these except the last.

On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 2:44 PM Michael Peel  wrote:

> … hence the existence of Wikimedia chapters? I suspect at least WMDE could
> take this on if it becomes necessary, although other chapters aren’t as
> technologically developed as I’d have liked to have seen.
>
> Thanks,
> Mike
>
> > On 30 Sep 2020, at 19:35, Steven Walling 
> wrote:
> >
> > SJ hinted at a related problem which is that we'd also need a backup
> > organizational structure to run things operationally and legally. If the
> US
> > becomes so politically unstable that hosting Wikimedia data is under
> threat
> > there, just moving the data would not be enough. You'd also have to
> include
> > a contingency plan that foresaw the need to legally operate the
> Foundation
> > (or an equivalent organization anyway) under a different jurisdiction
> > with corporate officers not subject to US law or extradition. If the
> > servers are hosted in the EU but the legally controlling body and its
> > employees are within the US, you could still see them legally forced to
> > comply with an order, just like companies are forced to do so in
> > other countries with censorious regimes today.
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 8:59 AM Samuel Klein  wrote:
> >
> >> We should have technical partners in multiple other jurisdictions that
> >> could help in a crisis, and load bearing infrastructure in at least one
> of
> >> them, and a plan for how and when to switch. (The walkthrough of what
> would
> >> be needed for a smooth transfer send most important, and useful for
> general
> >> reliability planning)
> >>
> >> We should also fully support and realize Wikimedia-on-ipfs, similar to
> what
> >> the internet archive had been doing. (Santhosh has some excellent ideas
> >> there)
> >>
> >> 
> >>
> >> On Wed., Sep. 30, 2020, 5:35 a.m. Dan Garry (Deskana), <
> djgw...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 09:49, Erik Moeller 
> wrote:
> >>>
>  I hope that some preliminary contingency plans exist or are being
>  developed, and I'm sure that the movement-wide debate will widen if
>  the US continues its downward slide into authoritarianism.
> 
> >>>
> >>> I agree with Erik. Even under the Obama administration, there were
> >> threats
> >>> to the existence of the movement, such as SOPA [1] which lead to a
> >> blackout
> >>> [2]. One can extrapolate from current events that these threats could
> >> well
> >>> get larger and more frequent, rather than smaller and less frequent,
> >> should
> >>> someone in the US Government decide to focus their attention on
> attacking
> >>> Wikipedia and free knowledge. It would be prudent to create a
> contingency
> >>> plan which includes an exploration of other options for a location of
> >>> operation for the Wikimedia Foundation and/or its servers, with their
> >>> advantages and disadvantages. I personally wouldn't necessarily
> advocate
> >>> for making the plan public; that would be ideal, but I'd be comforted
> >>> merely to know it exists.
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, 29 Sep 2020 at 23:36, Joseph Seddon 
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
>  I believe options are going to be explored for sustainability but
> right
> >>> now
>  legally speaking the US is the best jurisdiction for hosting us now
> and
> >>> the
>  foreseeable future.
> 
> >>>
> >>> I agree with this too. For now, the United States remains the best
> place
> >>> for the organisation to operate out of, and a move should not be
> actively
> >>> considered.
> >>>
> >>> Dan
> >>>
> >>> [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act
> >>> [2]:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moving the technical infrastructure out of the US

[Michael Peel]

… hence the existence of Wikimedia chapters? I suspect at least WMDE could take 
this on if it becomes necessary, although other chapters aren’t as 
technologically developed as I’d have liked to have seen.

Thanks,
Mike

> On 30 Sep 2020, at 19:35, Steven Walling  wrote:
> 
> SJ hinted at a related problem which is that we'd also need a backup
> organizational structure to run things operationally and legally. If the US
> becomes so politically unstable that hosting Wikimedia data is under threat
> there, just moving the data would not be enough. You'd also have to include
> a contingency plan that foresaw the need to legally operate the Foundation
> (or an equivalent organization anyway) under a different jurisdiction
> with corporate officers not subject to US law or extradition. If the
> servers are hosted in the EU but the legally controlling body and its
> employees are within the US, you could still see them legally forced to
> comply with an order, just like companies are forced to do so in
> other countries with censorious regimes today.
> 
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 8:59 AM Samuel Klein  wrote:
> 
>> We should have technical partners in multiple other jurisdictions that
>> could help in a crisis, and load bearing infrastructure in at least one of
>> them, and a plan for how and when to switch. (The walkthrough of what would
>> be needed for a smooth transfer send most important, and useful for general
>> reliability planning)
>> 
>> We should also fully support and realize Wikimedia-on-ipfs, similar to what
>> the internet archive had been doing. (Santhosh has some excellent ideas
>> there)
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed., Sep. 30, 2020, 5:35 a.m. Dan Garry (Deskana), 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 09:49, Erik Moeller  wrote:
>>> 
 I hope that some preliminary contingency plans exist or are being
 developed, and I'm sure that the movement-wide debate will widen if
 the US continues its downward slide into authoritarianism.
 
>>> 
>>> I agree with Erik. Even under the Obama administration, there were
>> threats
>>> to the existence of the movement, such as SOPA [1] which lead to a
>> blackout
>>> [2]. One can extrapolate from current events that these threats could
>> well
>>> get larger and more frequent, rather than smaller and less frequent,
>> should
>>> someone in the US Government decide to focus their attention on attacking
>>> Wikipedia and free knowledge. It would be prudent to create a contingency
>>> plan which includes an exploration of other options for a location of
>>> operation for the Wikimedia Foundation and/or its servers, with their
>>> advantages and disadvantages. I personally wouldn't necessarily advocate
>>> for making the plan public; that would be ideal, but I'd be comforted
>>> merely to know it exists.
>>> 
>>> On Tue, 29 Sep 2020 at 23:36, Joseph Seddon 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
 I believe options are going to be explored for sustainability but right
>>> now
 legally speaking the US is the best jurisdiction for hosting us now and
>>> the
 foreseeable future.
 
>>> 
>>> I agree with this too. For now, the United States remains the best place
>>> for the organisation to operate out of, and a move should not be actively
>>> considered.
>>> 
>>> Dan
>>> 
>>> [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act
>>> [2]:
>>> 
>>> 
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_SOPA_and_PIPA#Wikimedia_community
>>> ___
>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>>> 
>>> 
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> 
>> 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moving the technical infrastructure out of the US

[Steven Walling]

SJ hinted at a related problem which is that we'd also need a backup
organizational structure to run things operationally and legally. If the US
becomes so politically unstable that hosting Wikimedia data is under threat
there, just moving the data would not be enough. You'd also have to include
a contingency plan that foresaw the need to legally operate the Foundation
(or an equivalent organization anyway) under a different jurisdiction
with corporate officers not subject to US law or extradition. If the
servers are hosted in the EU but the legally controlling body and its
employees are within the US, you could still see them legally forced to
comply with an order, just like companies are forced to do so in
other countries with censorious regimes today.

On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 8:59 AM Samuel Klein  wrote:

> We should have technical partners in multiple other jurisdictions that
> could help in a crisis, and load bearing infrastructure in at least one of
> them, and a plan for how and when to switch. (The walkthrough of what would
> be needed for a smooth transfer send most important, and useful for general
> reliability planning)
>
> We should also fully support and realize Wikimedia-on-ipfs, similar to what
> the internet archive had been doing. (Santhosh has some excellent ideas
> there)
>
> 
>
> On Wed., Sep. 30, 2020, 5:35 a.m. Dan Garry (Deskana), 
> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 09:49, Erik Moeller  wrote:
> >
> > > I hope that some preliminary contingency plans exist or are being
> > > developed, and I'm sure that the movement-wide debate will widen if
> > > the US continues its downward slide into authoritarianism.
> > >
> >
> > I agree with Erik. Even under the Obama administration, there were
> threats
> > to the existence of the movement, such as SOPA [1] which lead to a
> blackout
> > [2]. One can extrapolate from current events that these threats could
> well
> > get larger and more frequent, rather than smaller and less frequent,
> should
> > someone in the US Government decide to focus their attention on attacking
> > Wikipedia and free knowledge. It would be prudent to create a contingency
> > plan which includes an exploration of other options for a location of
> > operation for the Wikimedia Foundation and/or its servers, with their
> > advantages and disadvantages. I personally wouldn't necessarily advocate
> > for making the plan public; that would be ideal, but I'd be comforted
> > merely to know it exists.
> >
> > On Tue, 29 Sep 2020 at 23:36, Joseph Seddon 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I believe options are going to be explored for sustainability but right
> > now
> > > legally speaking the US is the best jurisdiction for hosting us now and
> > the
> > > foreseeable future.
> > >
> >
> > I agree with this too. For now, the United States remains the best place
> > for the organisation to operate out of, and a move should not be actively
> > considered.
> >
> > Dan
> >
> > [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act
> > [2]:
> >
> >
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_SOPA_and_PIPA#Wikimedia_community
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moving the technical infrastructure out of the US

[Samuel Klein]

We should have technical partners in multiple other jurisdictions that
could help in a crisis, and load bearing infrastructure in at least one of
them, and a plan for how and when to switch. (The walkthrough of what would
be needed for a smooth transfer send most important, and useful for general
reliability planning)

We should also fully support and realize Wikimedia-on-ipfs, similar to what
the internet archive had been doing. (Santhosh has some excellent ideas
there)



On Wed., Sep. 30, 2020, 5:35 a.m. Dan Garry (Deskana), 
wrote:

> On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 09:49, Erik Moeller  wrote:
>
> > I hope that some preliminary contingency plans exist or are being
> > developed, and I'm sure that the movement-wide debate will widen if
> > the US continues its downward slide into authoritarianism.
> >
>
> I agree with Erik. Even under the Obama administration, there were threats
> to the existence of the movement, such as SOPA [1] which lead to a blackout
> [2]. One can extrapolate from current events that these threats could well
> get larger and more frequent, rather than smaller and less frequent, should
> someone in the US Government decide to focus their attention on attacking
> Wikipedia and free knowledge. It would be prudent to create a contingency
> plan which includes an exploration of other options for a location of
> operation for the Wikimedia Foundation and/or its servers, with their
> advantages and disadvantages. I personally wouldn't necessarily advocate
> for making the plan public; that would be ideal, but I'd be comforted
> merely to know it exists.
>
> On Tue, 29 Sep 2020 at 23:36, Joseph Seddon 
> wrote:
>
> > I believe options are going to be explored for sustainability but right
> now
> > legally speaking the US is the best jurisdiction for hosting us now and
> the
> > foreseeable future.
> >
>
> I agree with this too. For now, the United States remains the best place
> for the organisation to operate out of, and a move should not be actively
> considered.
>
> Dan
>
> [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act
> [2]:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_SOPA_and_PIPA#Wikimedia_community
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moving the technical infrastructure out of the US

[Pascal Martin]

Hi all, 


Maybe one way in France :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renater 


I could contact them if it s possible, and more particularly the criann
he would only charge for electricity.
At the same time this allows to be able to save energy for users who
consult wikipedia in Europe.

https://www.criann.fr/

Le 2020-09-30 13:12, Gereon Kalkuhl a écrit :


Hi all,

as Dimi said, there had been some discussions about this topic over the years. 
Unfortunately they were not taken for serious, for example 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Move_the_WMF_and_Servers_to_Iceland
 .

And there is not only the political issue, there are environmental concerns as 
well. Earthquakes and fires in California, Hurricanes in the South.

Cheers, Gereon

Am 30.09.2020 um 11:44 schrieb Dimitar Parvanov Dimitrov: Hi all,

We have had discussions on this with many Wikimedians over the years, but
frankly, the issue never seemed pressing enough to pursue more seriously.
Some points made that I remember where:

- Perhaps it is enough to just have back-up servers in another
jurisdictions that could kick-in and whose capacity could quickly be
upgraded in case of need.
- Nordic jurisdictions like Iceland and Norway frequently came up with
the arguments: stable political systems, solid digital rights track
records, a climate that helps save energy on cooling servers & availability
of hydropower (i.e. environmental benefits).

I think such a move would require serious studies and long, community-wide
debates. I can not assess how urgent it is. But then again, waiting until
it is a real issue is probably not a great idea.

Cheers,
Dimi

На ср, 30.09.2020 г. в 11:35 Dan Garry (Deskana)  написа:

On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 09:49, Erik Moeller  wrote:

I hope that some preliminary contingency plans exist or are being
developed, and I'm sure that the movement-wide debate will widen if
the US continues its downward slide into authoritarianism.

I agree with Erik. Even under the Obama administration, there were threats
to the existence of the movement, such as SOPA [1 [1]] which lead to a blackout
[2]. One can extrapolate from current events that these threats could well
get larger and more frequent, rather than smaller and less frequent, should
someone in the US Government decide to focus their attention on attacking
Wikipedia and free knowledge. It would be prudent to create a contingency
plan which includes an exploration of other options for a location of
operation for the Wikimedia Foundation and/or its servers, with their
advantages and disadvantages. I personally wouldn't necessarily advocate
for making the plan public; that would be ideal, but I'd be comforted
merely to know it exists.

On Tue, 29 Sep 2020 at 23:36, Joseph Seddon 
wrote:

I believe options are going to be explored for sustainability but right now 
legally speaking the US is the best jurisdiction for hosting us now and the 
foreseeable future.

I agree with this too. For now, the United States remains the best place
for the organisation to operate out of, and a move should not be actively
considered.

Dan

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act
[2]:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_SOPA_and_PIPA#Wikimedia_community
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 


--
Cordialement
Pascal Martin
06 13 89 77 32 


Links:
--
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moving the technical infrastructure out of the US

[Gereon Kalkuhl]

Hi all,

as Dimi said, there had been some discussions about this topic over the 
years. Unfortunately they were not taken for serious, for example 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Move_the_WMF_and_Servers_to_Iceland 
.


And there is not only the political issue, there are environmental 
concerns as well. Earthquakes and fires in California, Hurricanes in the 
South.


Cheers, Gereon

Am 30.09.2020 um 11:44 schrieb Dimitar Parvanov Dimitrov:

Hi all,

We have had discussions on this with many Wikimedians over the years, but
frankly, the issue never seemed pressing enough to pursue more seriously.
Some points made that I remember where:


- Perhaps it is enough to just have back-up servers in another
jurisdictions that could kick-in and whose capacity could quickly be
upgraded in case of need.
- Nordic jurisdictions like Iceland and Norway frequently came up with
the arguments: stable political systems, solid digital rights track
records, a climate that helps save energy on cooling servers & availability
of hydropower (i.e. environmental benefits).

I think such a move would require serious studies and long, community-wide
debates. I can not assess how urgent it is. But then again, waiting until
it is a real issue is probably not a great idea.

Cheers,
Dimi

На ср, 30.09.2020 г. в 11:35 Dan Garry (Deskana)  написа:


On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 09:49, Erik Moeller  wrote:


I hope that some preliminary contingency plans exist or are being
developed, and I'm sure that the movement-wide debate will widen if
the US continues its downward slide into authoritarianism.


I agree with Erik. Even under the Obama administration, there were threats
to the existence of the movement, such as SOPA [1] which lead to a blackout
[2]. One can extrapolate from current events that these threats could well
get larger and more frequent, rather than smaller and less frequent, should
someone in the US Government decide to focus their attention on attacking
Wikipedia and free knowledge. It would be prudent to create a contingency
plan which includes an exploration of other options for a location of
operation for the Wikimedia Foundation and/or its servers, with their
advantages and disadvantages. I personally wouldn't necessarily advocate
for making the plan public; that would be ideal, but I'd be comforted
merely to know it exists.

On Tue, 29 Sep 2020 at 23:36, Joseph Seddon 
wrote:


I believe options are going to be explored for sustainability but right

now

legally speaking the US is the best jurisdiction for hosting us now and

the

foreseeable future.


I agree with this too. For now, the United States remains the best place
for the organisation to operate out of, and a move should not be actively
considered.

Dan

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act
[2]:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_SOPA_and_PIPA#Wikimedia_community
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 




___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moving the technical infrastructure out of the US

[Gnangarra]

I agree there does a appear to be a need for the WMF and Board to consider
a contingency plan, does it need to be public? I'm not as convinced.

Privacy is just one of many questions that would have to be addressed, with
that being said it's important. There are other equally important needs
from copyright to freedom of speech to financial to social  and political
stability.

When it comes to privacy how many of us are using, Google, Microsoft,
Apple products, or even other services that  have a global presence.  While
many of us are concerned about the potential for political actions every
country is grappling with the corporate, tax, and privacy issues related to
these companies as well.  Politically Trump style leadership is a concern,
not just in the USA but right across what were politically stable
countries.

It'd be remiss of the WMF if they already didn't have alternative servers(I
know they do) and backups outside San Francisco, and Florida given the
susceptibility of both locations to natural disasters and climate change
issues.  All of these make it beyond the capability of the community to
effectively evaluate in a public forum like this.  The best the community
this can do in this space is to give support to the WMF and the Board to
explore, evaluate, and follow the dynamics of political realities of where
a move could go because any change will need to be immediately effective,
If was to become necessary to take such actions to protect the movement and
knowledge we have collected  a long drawn out debate will be out of the
questions, and decisions made today, this month, this year could in all
likelihood be just as invalid.

On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 18:01, Dimitar Parvanov Dimitrov <
dimitar.parvanov.dimit...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> We have had discussions on this with many Wikimedians over the years, but
> frankly, the issue never seemed pressing enough to pursue more seriously.
> Some points made that I remember where:
>
>
>- Perhaps it is enough to just have back-up servers in another
>jurisdictions that could kick-in and whose capacity could quickly be
>upgraded in case of need.
>- Nordic jurisdictions like Iceland and Norway frequently came up with
>the arguments: stable political systems, solid digital rights track
>records, a climate that helps save energy on cooling servers &
> availability
>of hydropower (i.e. environmental benefits).
>
> I think such a move would require serious studies and long, community-wide
> debates. I can not assess how urgent it is. But then again, waiting until
> it is a real issue is probably not a great idea.
>
> Cheers,
> Dimi
>
> На ср, 30.09.2020 г. в 11:35 Dan Garry (Deskana) 
> написа:
>
> > On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 09:49, Erik Moeller  wrote:
> >
> > > I hope that some preliminary contingency plans exist or are being
> > > developed, and I'm sure that the movement-wide debate will widen if
> > > the US continues its downward slide into authoritarianism.
> > >
> >
> > I agree with Erik. Even under the Obama administration, there were
> threats
> > to the existence of the movement, such as SOPA [1] which lead to a
> blackout
> > [2]. One can extrapolate from current events that these threats could
> well
> > get larger and more frequent, rather than smaller and less frequent,
> should
> > someone in the US Government decide to focus their attention on attacking
> > Wikipedia and free knowledge. It would be prudent to create a contingency
> > plan which includes an exploration of other options for a location of
> > operation for the Wikimedia Foundation and/or its servers, with their
> > advantages and disadvantages. I personally wouldn't necessarily advocate
> > for making the plan public; that would be ideal, but I'd be comforted
> > merely to know it exists.
> >
> > On Tue, 29 Sep 2020 at 23:36, Joseph Seddon 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I believe options are going to be explored for sustainability but right
> > now
> > > legally speaking the US is the best jurisdiction for hosting us now and
> > the
> > > foreseeable future.
> > >
> >
> > I agree with this too. For now, the United States remains the best place
> > for the organisation to operate out of, and a move should not be actively
> > considered.
> >
> > Dan
> >
> > [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act
> > [2]:
> >
> >
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_SOPA_and_PIPA#Wikimedia_community
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moving the technical infrastructure out of the US

[Dimitar Parvanov Dimitrov]

Hi all,

We have had discussions on this with many Wikimedians over the years, but
frankly, the issue never seemed pressing enough to pursue more seriously.
Some points made that I remember where:


   - Perhaps it is enough to just have back-up servers in another
   jurisdictions that could kick-in and whose capacity could quickly be
   upgraded in case of need.
   - Nordic jurisdictions like Iceland and Norway frequently came up with
   the arguments: stable political systems, solid digital rights track
   records, a climate that helps save energy on cooling servers & availability
   of hydropower (i.e. environmental benefits).

I think such a move would require serious studies and long, community-wide
debates. I can not assess how urgent it is. But then again, waiting until
it is a real issue is probably not a great idea.

Cheers,
Dimi

На ср, 30.09.2020 г. в 11:35 Dan Garry (Deskana)  написа:

> On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 09:49, Erik Moeller  wrote:
>
> > I hope that some preliminary contingency plans exist or are being
> > developed, and I'm sure that the movement-wide debate will widen if
> > the US continues its downward slide into authoritarianism.
> >
>
> I agree with Erik. Even under the Obama administration, there were threats
> to the existence of the movement, such as SOPA [1] which lead to a blackout
> [2]. One can extrapolate from current events that these threats could well
> get larger and more frequent, rather than smaller and less frequent, should
> someone in the US Government decide to focus their attention on attacking
> Wikipedia and free knowledge. It would be prudent to create a contingency
> plan which includes an exploration of other options for a location of
> operation for the Wikimedia Foundation and/or its servers, with their
> advantages and disadvantages. I personally wouldn't necessarily advocate
> for making the plan public; that would be ideal, but I'd be comforted
> merely to know it exists.
>
> On Tue, 29 Sep 2020 at 23:36, Joseph Seddon 
> wrote:
>
> > I believe options are going to be explored for sustainability but right
> now
> > legally speaking the US is the best jurisdiction for hosting us now and
> the
> > foreseeable future.
> >
>
> I agree with this too. For now, the United States remains the best place
> for the organisation to operate out of, and a move should not be actively
> considered.
>
> Dan
>
> [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act
> [2]:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_SOPA_and_PIPA#Wikimedia_community
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moving the technical infrastructure out of the US

[Dan Garry (Deskana)]

On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 09:49, Erik Moeller  wrote:

> I hope that some preliminary contingency plans exist or are being
> developed, and I'm sure that the movement-wide debate will widen if
> the US continues its downward slide into authoritarianism.
>

I agree with Erik. Even under the Obama administration, there were threats
to the existence of the movement, such as SOPA [1] which lead to a blackout
[2]. One can extrapolate from current events that these threats could well
get larger and more frequent, rather than smaller and less frequent, should
someone in the US Government decide to focus their attention on attacking
Wikipedia and free knowledge. It would be prudent to create a contingency
plan which includes an exploration of other options for a location of
operation for the Wikimedia Foundation and/or its servers, with their
advantages and disadvantages. I personally wouldn't necessarily advocate
for making the plan public; that would be ideal, but I'd be comforted
merely to know it exists.

On Tue, 29 Sep 2020 at 23:36, Joseph Seddon  wrote:

> I believe options are going to be explored for sustainability but right now
> legally speaking the US is the best jurisdiction for hosting us now and the
> foreseeable future.
>

I agree with this too. For now, the United States remains the best place
for the organisation to operate out of, and a move should not be actively
considered.

Dan

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act
[2]:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_SOPA_and_PIPA#Wikimedia_community
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moving the technical infrastructure out of the US

[Erik Moeller]

On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 3:36 PM Joseph Seddon  wrote:

> I believe options are going to be explored for sustainability but right now
> legally speaking the US is the best jurisdiction for hosting us now

Certainly.

> and the foreseeable future.

I can't foresee the future. But Trump's first term in office is very
troubling. Relentless attacks on journalists, escalation of political
violence, attempts to undermine Section 230 protections, attempts to
remove apps from app stores by Executive Order, etc.  -- checked by a
judiciary that's increasingly aligned with the Trump agenda. That's
the United States today. From this we can extrapolate plausible
scenarios in which the question where to locate Wikimedia's core
assets could become the single most urgent strategic question the
movement faces.

I hope that some preliminary contingency plans exist or are being
developed, and I'm sure that the movement-wide debate will widen if
the US continues its downward slide into authoritarianism.

Erik

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moving the technical infrastructure out of the US

[Joseph Seddon]

Agreed. This is a perennial issue.

I believe options are going to be explored for sustainability but right now
legally speaking the US is the best jurisdiction for hosting us now and the
foreseeable future.

Seddon

On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 11:30 PM Nathan  wrote:

> Which political system would you prefer, so9q? Just a quick survey finds a
> shortage of totally ideal alternatives with no objectionable political
> activity in recent years.
>
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 6:20 PM  wrote:
>
> >
> > Hi
> >
> > The US seems to me like an increasingly unsafe and unstable place to
> > store data and servers from a privacy- and political perspective.
> >
> > Do you have any plans to replicate or move the servers to datacenters in
> > Europe or elsewhere to protect the community from the risks
> > introduced by the american political system?
> >
> > See https:// youtu.be/mUQ56Tf22pg and
> >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Forum#Strong_Preservation_of_Wikipedia_(&_Wikimedia)_contents_for_the_far_future
> > .
> >
> > Cheers
> > so9q
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moving the technical infrastructure out of the US

[Nathan]

Which political system would you prefer, so9q? Just a quick survey finds a
shortage of totally ideal alternatives with no objectionable political
activity in recent years.

On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 6:20 PM  wrote:

>
> Hi
>
> The US seems to me like an increasingly unsafe and unstable place to
> store data and servers from a privacy- and political perspective.
>
> Do you have any plans to replicate or move the servers to datacenters in
> Europe or elsewhere to protect the community from the risks
> introduced by the american political system?
>
> See https:// youtu.be/mUQ56Tf22pg and
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Forum#Strong_Preservation_of_Wikipedia_(&_Wikimedia)_contents_for_the_far_future
> .
>
> Cheers
> so9q
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,