Hi everyone, I don't believe the Terms are meant to expressly adopt all foreign laws outside the United States. The community discussed the phrase "applicable law" a few times during the drafting process. The Terms of Use only expressly call out the United States as applicable law in the Overview section and section 1(b). There is no express adoption of another foreign law by name: the Terms of Use only use the word "may" for laws other than the United States, simply putting users on notice of their possible application.
Along those lines, the Terms of Use (Section 1(b)) do try to provide a fair warning to our users about their local laws and enforcement by government authorities. Specifically, the Terms say in Section 1(b): "Although we may not agree with such actions, we warn editors and contributors that authorities may seek to apply other country laws to you, including local laws where you live or where you view or edit content." Furthermore, in the last paragraph of section 4, WMF reserves the discretion to enforce that section which governs certain behaviors on the sites. Considering the totality of the circumstances, the WMF wouldn't try to enforce section 4 (or any other parts of the Terms of Use) in a way that was not aligned with our mission. For example, we would never try to use the Terms against a dissident in a censored country who tries to express himself or herself truthfully and freely on-wiki, in violation of their local laws. (As pointed out during the drafting process, this provision is consistent with other like-minded organizations' terms. Creative Commons,[0] the Internet Archive,[1] and the Open Source Initiative's[2] terms, for example, require users to comply with "applicable" laws.) Thanks, pb 0. https://creativecommons.org/terms (Section 7) 1. http://archive.org/about/terms.php (Paragraph 3) 2. http://www.opensource.org/ToS (Section 5) ___________________ Philippe Beaudette Director, Community Advocacy Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 415-839-6885, x 6643 phili...@wikimedia.org On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 7:03 AM, Nathan <nawr...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 9:45 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) <nemow...@gmail.com > >wrote: > > > birgitte...@yahoo.com, 03/05/2012 14:17: > > > > Encouraging people outside the US to live as though they live inside it, > >> is neither wise nor ethical. > >> > > > > On the other hand, this is what happens (o could have happened) in other > > parts of the Terms of use which apply to /users/ (not their > contributions) > > the USA laws where they're more restrictive. The whole section > "Refraining > > from Certain Activities" has this problem, which is very hard to avoid > > given that nobody really knows what the "applicable law" is. There was a > > lot of work on this part as well, I'm not able to judge the results. > > Both problems originate from the decision to enforce via a private > > contract the state laws (privatization of justice or statement of the > > obvious? I don't know). The old ToU left everything implicit (or were > > reticent, depending on how you see it). > > > > Nemo > > > > It only makes sense to be somewhat explicit about the laws that apply, > since they apply regardless of their presence in the ToU. > _______________________________________________ > 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