[Foundation-l] Latest board resolutions

Mon Jul 31 05:23:50 UTC 2006

Michael R. Irwin wrote:

>>If you want immunity 
>>against legal threats in the western world (and for what outlaw 
>>purpose would you want this?), you probably have to relocate to 
>>North Korea, Syria or Zimbabwe.
>> 
>>
>>    
>>
>Personally I do not think we need or want immunity, nor do I think it is 
>possible.   In my view compliance is reasonable and required.  
>
>I do think making damn sure that the millions of manhours of donated 
>effort spent developing the Wikimedia project data can not be partially 
>or totally wasted by the simple expedient of purchasing all media and 
>data rights of the WMF from a liquidation authority for a few thousand 
>dollars and then filing nuisance lawsuits against anyone posting or 
>publishing online the entire dataset from backups.
>
>If you do not like the above scenario make up your own and consider how 
>to defuse it.  
>
>The datasets the WMF supports online are just now getting to the point 
>of potentially depressing sales of millions and then hundreds of 
>millions and then billions of dollars of published materials in the 
>U.S.A annually.    The publishing industry in the U.S. is not going to 
>roll over and modernize any easier than the record labels, Disney, 
>U.S.Government; and the other DRM proponents did.  They can buy access 
>to the U.S. Congress just as easy as anyone else.
>
>Nor is it unlikely that the U.S. government might like a return to more 
>easily controlled media focal points.    I do not know if you have 
>noticed; but as official policy, both foreign and domestic, the U.S. now 
>employs torture, has secret courts (an oxy moron), and has an executive 
>branch which does not even meet its responsibility under federal law to 
>tell a secret court within 3 days why it backdated the ability for 
>secret police raids, searches, wiretaps, etc.   This is a substantial 
>departure from the typical U.S. citizen's mental image of the "land of 
>the free".
>
>Some people claim this is standard practice while at War while others 
>claim this is a substantial departure from U.S. policy, laws, and 
>expectations.   The one thing that is clear is that the "War on Terror" 
>is likely to be finished when the office of the U.S. president (POTUS) 
>says it is finished.   It is not prudent to be relying exclusively on 
>the Constitution of the United States for the ability to publicly 
>publish useful information potentially detrimental to large business or 
>government interests in the U.S.
>
>If this is a nonissue because duplicate dataset updates are routinely 
>sent to various chapters that have agreed to serve as out of U.S. 
>control zones backups and reestablish internet access within six months 
>of WMF shutdown; then maybe someone can say so publicly and we can leave 
>all risk management issues and elimination of single points of failure 
>to the God King and his designated Trustees and staff.
>
>BTW,  is a completed audit on the WMF's first few years of operation 
>posted somewhere online where interested parties such as myself can 
>review it?
>
>If it is not posted, but available upon request, then I would like to 
>request copies or be placed upon the distribution list so I get copies 
>when they become available.
>
>later,
>lazyquasar
>_______________________________________________
>foundation-l mailing list
>foundation-l at wikimedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>  
>
Oh come on guys, WMF is not going to get swept away, and they do not 
enjoy "sovereign immunity" because they are

1. Not a State (11th Ammendment)
2. Not the United States Goverment (must have Waiver of Immunity)
3. Not an Indian Nation

They are a non-profit corp, which gives them all the rights of any 
citizen (since a corporation is a citizen).

They do GOOD THINGS, and they act in GOOD FAITH.

They are not going away (unless they want to), getting smashed, or being 
litigated into oblivion. If things really get
that bad, they can co-locate their hosting on Indian Land somewhere 
under "Native American Language Preservation"
and then they truly will have immunity from most causes of action if the 
program is run by one of the tribes with an English version
of the site as an adjunct "add on" non-primary site.

Jeff