On 30 June 2012 22:45, Tom Morris <tom(a)tommorris.org> wrote:
The Foundation and the projects are kept at arms
length because of s.230 of the Communications Decency Act in the U.S. so that the
Foundation isn't held legally responsible as the "publisher" of content on
Wikipedia, but instead delegates that publication to the community, and instead seeing
themselves as the hosting company. Fine. I expect the Foundation lawyers know how to do
just that, and where the line is.
But, the problem is under the Draft Communications Bill, if the Secretary of State wished
to serve "Wikipedia" or "Wikimedia" generally with a s.1 notice, how
would that play out? Could WMUK be held responsible under this Bill? How about individual
volunteers?
This draft act isn't aimed at publishers, it is aimed at service
providers, so it would definitely be the WMF that is considered
responsible for Wikipedia. I can't see any other interpretation.