Mailing List Archive

> On Thu, 2009-04-23 at 07:51:27 GMT, David Gerard wrote:
> http://newteevee.com/2009/04/20/achtung-youtube-germany-proposes-federal-id-checks-for-online-video-sites/
>
> German readers - how much of a danger is this? Is Commons enough of a
"video site"?
>
> - d.

Not much. It is just a campaign of the Junge Union NRW to get in the media. Like every German political youth organisation, they have to make wired statements, to get any media coverage.

syrcro
--
Neu: GMX FreeDSL Komplettanschluss mit DSL 6.000 Flatrate + Telefonanschluss für nur 17,95 Euro/mtl.!* http://dslspecial.gmx.de/freedsl-surfflat/?ac=OM.AD.PD003K11308T4569a

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

I would guess probably not. Then again I am not German and have no legal training in the Basic Code.




________________________________
From: David Gerard <dgerard@gmail.com>
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 12:51:27 AM
Subject: [Foundation-l] ID requirements proposed for Germans using video sites

http://newteevee.com/2009/04/20/achtung-youtube-germany-proposes-federal-id-checks-for-online-video-sites/

German readers - how much of a danger is this? Is Commons enough of a
"video site"?


- d.

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




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

2009/4/23 David Gerard <dgerard@gmail.com>:
> http://newteevee.com/2009/04/20/achtung-youtube-germany-proposes-federal-id-checks-for-online-video-sites/
>
> German readers - how much of a danger is this? Is Commons enough of a
> "video site"?

Commons isn't a German site, so I don't see a problem. The WMF has
always said that it intends to follow US law only and not try and
cater to the laws of every country in the world - that includes
Germany. The article mentions a plan to force German ISPs to block
illegal sites, but that seems to be just to do with child pornography,
similar to the IWF blacklist in the UK (but done officially, so it
might actually be accountable). It seems unlikely to me that Germany
would block access to non-child porn foreign sites until this law,
people would immeadiately start comparing it to China and I doubt they
want that.

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

On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 6:30 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton@gmail.com> wrote:
> ... The WMF has
> always said that it intends to follow US law only and not try and
> cater to the laws of every country in the world - that includes
> Germany

{{citation needed}}

Sebastian

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

2009/4/23 Sebastian Moleski <sebmol@gmail.com>:
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 6:30 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton@gmail.com> wrote:
>> ... The WMF has
>> always said that it intends to follow US law only and not try and
>> cater to the laws of every country in the world - that includes
>> Germany
>
> {{citation needed}}

What do want a citation for, the WMF statement or the fact that
Germany is part of the world?

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

2009/4/23 Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton@gmail.com>:

> Commons isn't a German site, so I don't see a problem. The WMF has
> always said that it intends to follow US law only and not try and
> cater to the laws of every country in the world - that includes
> Germany. The article mentions a plan to force German ISPs to block
> illegal sites, but that seems to be just to do with child pornography,
> similar to the IWF blacklist in the UK (but done officially, so it
> might actually be accountable). It seems unlikely to me that Germany
> would block access to non-child porn foreign sites until this law,
> people would immeadiately start comparing it to China and I doubt they
> want that.


Heh. You do realise a lot of the Commons copyright rules started as
the intersection of US and German law? That's why there's quite a lot
of Commons admins from de:wp.

In any case, us saying (in diplomatic wording) "don't be silly" would
probably carry a lot of weight.


- d.

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

2009/4/23 David Gerard <dgerard@gmail.com>:
> 2009/4/23 Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton@gmail.com>:
>
>> Commons isn't a German site, so I don't see a problem. The WMF has
>> always said that it intends to follow US law only and not try and
>> cater to the laws of every country in the world - that includes
>> Germany. The article mentions a plan to force German ISPs to block
>> illegal sites, but that seems to be just to do with child pornography,
>> similar to the IWF blacklist in the UK (but done officially, so it
>> might actually be accountable). It seems unlikely to me that Germany
>> would block access to non-child porn foreign sites until this law,
>> people would immeadiately start comparing it to China and I doubt they
>> want that.
>
>
> Heh. You do realise a lot of the Commons copyright rules started as
> the intersection of US and German law? That's why there's quite a lot
> of Commons admins from de:wp.

No, I didn't realise that, I don't have much to do with commons, or
images in general. I don't see how that is relevant, though.

> In any case, us saying (in diplomatic wording) "don't be silly" would
> probably carry a lot of weight.

Indeed.

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

2009/4/23 Sebastian Moleski <sebmol@gmail.com>:
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 6:30 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton@gmail.com> wrote:

>> ... The WMF has
>> always said that it intends to follow US law only and not try and
>> cater to the laws of every country in the world - that includes
>> Germany

> {{citation needed}}


The same reason we told the National Portrait Gallery in the UK "sue
and be damned" and haven't heard a peep from them since ;-)

(Not that being hardarsed is a good way to make friends. The Victoria
and Albert openly encouraging photographers for Wikipedia Loves Art is
more the sort of example we'd like to encourage - help their
educational mission and encourage people to go along, look at their
stuff, chuck a few quid in the donation box, etc.)


- d.

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

On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 10:51 AM, <syrcro@gmx.de> wrote:

>
> > On Thu, 2009-04-23 at 07:51:27 GMT, David Gerard wrote:
> >
> http://newteevee.com/2009/04/20/achtung-youtube-germany-proposes-federal-id-checks-for-online-video-sites/
> >
> > German readers - how much of a danger is this? Is Commons enough of a
> "video site"?
> >
> > - d.
>
> Not much. It is just a campaign of the Junge Union NRW to get in the media.
> Like every German political youth organisation, they have to make wired
> statements, to get any media coverage.
>
> syrcro
>
>
Just to clarify: There is no proposition from any party in any parliament in
Germany for this. It was a press release by the youth organization of the
CDU in North Rhine - Westphalia (the Junge Union NRW, as mentioned by
syncro). Some news sources seem to have picked up that Merkel thought of the
idea to be good - I can't find any direct quote or citation for this.

They are however going to propose this at a state level party congress in
early May, let's see how the CDU members in general react.

The leader (Sven Volmering) of this subgroup has also called ego-shooters,
popularly called "Killergames" (Killerspiele) in the German media and
politicians as of recently, a "perverted freetime activity".

And by the way: Another thing to remember is that it's election year here in
Germany, so you can expect to see a lot more weird press releases being
blown up into major stories - especially ones from youth organisations.

Ian
[[User:Poeloq]]
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 6:44 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> ...The WMF has
>>> always said that it intends to follow US law only and not try and
>>> cater to the laws of every country in the world - that includes
>>> Germany
>>
>> {{citation needed}}
>
> What do want a citation for, the WMF statement or the fact that
> Germany is part of the world?

I'm asking for citation that the foundation always said it intends to
follow US law only.

Sebastian

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

I think he was joking. I got a pretty nice laugh out of that.

skype: node.ue



2009/4/23 Sebastian Moleski <sebmol@gmail.com>:
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 6:44 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> ...The WMF has
>>>> always said that it intends to follow US law only and not try and
>>>> cater to the laws of every country in the world - that includes
>>>> Germany
>>>
>>> {{citation needed}}
>>
>> What do want a citation for, the WMF statement or the fact that
>> Germany is part of the world?
>
> I'm asking for citation that the foundation always said it intends to
> follow US law only.
>
> Sebastian
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

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