On 27 May 2010 19:48, Michael Peel em...@mikepeel.net wrote:
On the surface, it looks reasonable for Wikimedia (meaning the WMF
primarily, but also WMUK if we ever assist with hosting), as we'd fall
straight under 9.1a as a facilitator and hence would clearly not be liable.
I have to admit to
Hi all,
I'm forwarding the email below as it affects Wikimedia a bit, due to the
following (extracted from Anthony Lester's Guardian article):
The Bill sets out the circumstances in which an internet service provider or
forum host should not be liable for defamatory material and sets time
Keep in mind that Private Members bills almost never pass. This will
draw attention to the issue, nothing more.
On 27 May 2010 19:48, Michael Peel em...@mikepeel.net wrote:
Hi all,
I'm forwarding the email below as it affects Wikimedia a bit, due to the
following (extracted from Anthony
On 27/05/2010 20:18, Thomas Dalton wrote:
Keep in mind that Private Members bills almost never pass. This will
draw attention to the issue, nothing more.
Well, the government has said it's going to reform libel law. It's just
a question of when and how far
KTC
--
Experience is a good
