On 04/08/2012 00:44, Mike Linksvayer wrote:
On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 3:38 PM, ??? <wiki-l...@phizz.demon.co.uk> wrote:
On 03/08/2012 16:24, Mike Linksvayer wrote:
On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 5:14 AM,  <wiki-l...@phizz.demon.co.uk>
wrote:
The proposal was floated by Jimmy Wales on the 10th of december, 1
day after a Creative Commons Board meeting, on which he sits
alongside the mother-in-law of Sergy Brin (Google), and on which
sit other representatives of other internet mega-corporations that
derive profit from user uploaded contents much of which is pirated,
or who make money from advertising on pirate sites.

I don't know what "other representatives" you could be referring to.

You have two board members that are closely associated with or paid by
Google. One of which is a development manager for YouTube

I see, you mean https://creativecommons.org/board#glenn who moved on
to Twitter almost a year and a half ago. Someone will update that
listing appropriately.



When I'm on committees and such like we swap email addresses, and contact details, and what is astonishing those contact details don't all change simple because someone has moved on elsewhere.

I note that also on the board you have listed three members from the Berkman Center, and Google provides 10% of all the Corporate Funding of that organisation. Direct corporate donations to Creative Commons are I believe dominated by large companies whose interests are similarly aligned with Google.

The issue here isn't that there is some smoking gun of direct corruption where people are told to do the Emperor's bidding, but that the antecedence of a SOPA boycott on wikipedia came 1 day after a CC board meeting the members of whom are Google friendly.

For legitimate content creators and filesharers in the US, SOPA held no worries, for the mega corporations of the internet that derive a large part of their income from infringing content, SOPA could be seen as a problem. Both wikipedia and Creative Commons sided with the Fat Cat's against the interests of the small content creators. In the case of Wikipedia the justification for doing so was tenuous in the extreme.

http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2012-July/121092.html




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

Reply via email to