Re: [Wikimedia-l] Mozilla, funded by advertisers, starts opposing privacy regulations

2017-05-22 Thread Rogol Domedonfors 
James

To take your points in reverse order: I was quoting from the big box on the
front page at https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Home

As to the first point, I think it is rather for those asserting that some
particular point falls within the Foundation's mission to make their case
that it would be a justifiable use of the donations that were given for the
furtherance of that mission.  It is not clear that improving the "readers
ability to access information without threat of eavesdropping by commercial
interests" is a primary component of a mission "to empower and engage
people around the world to collect and develop educational content under a free
license  or in the public
domain, and to disseminate it effectively and globally" if that is the
formulation you prefer.  They may be cognate, but they are not the same.

Since it is so well established, in your opinion, that "privacy is
essential to [...] the creation of educational content by Foundation
volunteers", perhaps you would be so kind as to point to the place where
that irrefutable argument is made public?  Particularly since many
volunteers clearly do not feel inhibited about contributing under their own
names.  Privacy may indeed be essential to "unfettered" access, but "free"
and "unfettered" are not quite synonymous.

"Rogol"

On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 7:58 PM, James Salsman  wrote:

> Rogol,
>
> First, it's very well established that privacy is essential to not
> just the creation of educational content by Foundation volunteers, but
> to the ability of readers to have unfettered access to that content. I
> am sure you are aware that the Foundation has been pursuing a lawsuit
> for years against the U.S. government to protect readers privacy:
> https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/field_document/
> 23._aclu_appeal_brief_2.17.2016.pdf
>
> The European Commission is seeking the power to fine ISPs for breaches
> to their users' privacy, which would certainly strengthen the
> Foundation's projects' readers ability to access information without
> threat of eavesdropping by commercial interests, such as having their
> searches for medical conditions made available for sale to insurance
> and marketing companies. If you have any reason to believe otherwise,
> please say so.
>
> Secondly, where did you find that mission statement you quoted? It is
> not the one at https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Mission_statement
>
>
> On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 12:02 AM, Rogol Domedonfors
>  wrote:
> > James,
> >
> > Could you articulate how, in your view, the implementation of the
> proposed
> > directive, or otherwise, would affect the Wikimedia Foundation's mission
> of
> > "encouraging the growth, development and distribution of free,
> > multilingual, educational content, and to providing the full content of
> > these wiki-based projects to the public free of charge," please?  Because
> > if you can't, then the answer to your question has to be "No, it isn't".
> >
> > "Rogol"
> >
> > On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 4:02 PM, James Salsman 
> wrote:
> >
> >> Here is an interesting quote of a Mozilla Foundation lawyer from
> >> https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/05/11/mozilla_wants_eu_
> >> to_slow_down_its_eprivacy_directive_process/
> >>
> >> "draft Regulation imposes very specific restrictions on the technology
> >> industry that may challenge the business models of some ISPs. In some
> >> areas, obligations are proscriptive, undermining the principle of
> >> technological neutrality that this legislation needs to withstand the
> >> test of time in a rapidly changing environment"
> >>
> >> Is it appropriate for the Wikimedia Foundation to respond to this sort
> >> of thing? Mozilla is almost entirely funded by ad-supported
> >> businesses at present.
> >>
> >> ___
> >> 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:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Mozilla, funded by advertisers, starts opposing privacy regulations

2017-05-22 Thread James Salsman 
Rogol,

First, it's very well established that privacy is essential to not
just the creation of educational content by Foundation volunteers, but
to the ability of readers to have unfettered access to that content. I
am sure you are aware that the Foundation has been pursuing a lawsuit
for years against the U.S. government to protect readers privacy:
https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/field_document/23._aclu_appeal_brief_2.17.2016.pdf

The European Commission is seeking the power to fine ISPs for breaches
to their users' privacy, which would certainly strengthen the
Foundation's projects' readers ability to access information without
threat of eavesdropping by commercial interests, such as having their
searches for medical conditions made available for sale to insurance
and marketing companies. If you have any reason to believe otherwise,
please say so.

Secondly, where did you find that mission statement you quoted? It is
not the one at https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Mission_statement


On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 12:02 AM, Rogol Domedonfors
 wrote:
> James,
>
> Could you articulate how, in your view, the implementation of the proposed
> directive, or otherwise, would affect the Wikimedia Foundation's mission of
> "encouraging the growth, development and distribution of free,
> multilingual, educational content, and to providing the full content of
> these wiki-based projects to the public free of charge," please?  Because
> if you can't, then the answer to your question has to be "No, it isn't".
>
> "Rogol"
>
> On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 4:02 PM, James Salsman  wrote:
>
>> Here is an interesting quote of a Mozilla Foundation lawyer from
>> https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/05/11/mozilla_wants_eu_
>> to_slow_down_its_eprivacy_directive_process/
>>
>> "draft Regulation imposes very specific restrictions on the technology
>> industry that may challenge the business models of some ISPs. In some
>> areas, obligations are proscriptive, undermining the principle of
>> technological neutrality that this legislation needs to withstand the
>> test of time in a rapidly changing environment"
>>
>> Is it appropriate for the Wikimedia Foundation to respond to this sort
>> of thing? Mozilla is almost entirely funded by ad-supported
>> businesses at present.
>>
>> ___
>> 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] Mozilla, funded by advertisers, starts opposing privacy regulations

2017-05-22 Thread Rogol Domedonfors 
James,

Could you articulate how, in your view, the implementation of the proposed
directive, or otherwise, would affect the Wikimedia Foundation's mission of
"encouraging the growth, development and distribution of free,
multilingual, educational content, and to providing the full content of
these wiki-based projects to the public free of charge," please?  Because
if you can't, then the answer to your question has to be "No, it isn't".

"Rogol"

On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 4:02 PM, James Salsman  wrote:

> Here is an interesting quote of a Mozilla Foundation lawyer from
> https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/05/11/mozilla_wants_eu_
> to_slow_down_its_eprivacy_directive_process/
>
> "draft Regulation imposes very specific restrictions on the technology
> industry that may challenge the business models of some ISPs. In some
> areas, obligations are proscriptive, undermining the principle of
> technological neutrality that this legislation needs to withstand the
> test of time in a rapidly changing environment"
>
> Is it appropriate for the Wikimedia Foundation to respond to this sort
> of thing? Mozilla is almost entirely funded by ad-supported
> businesses at present.
>
> ___
> 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,