Wikipedia, Reddit Shutdown

[hellionist]

Not sure if this is supposed to be in the isyu101 section, but it concerns all the netizens of the world.

Wikipedia will shut down for 24 hours on Wednesday to protest against SOPA
16th January 2012 by Drew Olanoff

Today, founder of the non-profit behind information archive Wikipedia, Jimmy Wales, announced that the site will go dark for 24 hours on Wednesday in protest of the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA).

Quote:

Student warning! Do your homework early. Wikipedia protesting bad law on Wednesday! #sop -@jimmy_wales

While only the English version of the site will be down, it accounts for 25 million daily visitors according to Wales:

Quote:

comScore estimates the English Wikipedia receives 25 million average daily visitors globally. -@jimmy_wales

When we talked to Wales in November, he told us that Wikipedia had over 420m unique monthly visitors, and there are now over 20 million articles on Wikipedia across almost 300 languages.

As we reported last week, the site was contemplating taking this action along with Reddit who announced that it would black out its site in protest against SOPA.

The 24 hour shutdown of Wikipedia will be replaced with instructions on how to reach out to your local US members of congress, and Wales says he hopes the measure will “melt phones” with volume:

Quote:

This is going to be wow. I hope Wikipedia will melt phone systems in Washington on Wednesday. Tell everyone you know! -@jimmy_wales

Along with Reddit, Wikipedia joins huge Internet names like WordPress, Mozilla, and all of the Cheezburger properties in Wednesday’s “black out” protest.

The proposed act endangers the future of sites like these by holding them directly accountable for content placed on them. It has been widely reported that if an act like this passed through and became actionable, many Internet businesses would suffer greatly due to new scrutiny placed on them by the government.

Source: wikipedia-will-shut-down-for-24-hours-on-wednesday-to-protest-against-sopa/

What is Protect IP/SOPA?

Is it because I don't buy enough Justin Bieber albums?

[KillaCrab]

can this be confirmed by an independent and reliable source?

[hellionist]

@killa
from Wikipedia itself

To: English Wikipedia Readers and Community
From: Sue Gardner, Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director
Date: January 16, 2012

Today, the Wikipedia community announced its decision to black out the English-language Wikipedia for 24 hours, worldwide, beginning at 05:00 UTC on Wednesday, January 18 (you can read the statement from the Wikimedia Foundation here). The blackout is a protest against proposed legislation in the United States—the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) in the U.S. House of Representatives, and the PROTECTIP Act (PIPA) in the U.S. Senate—that, if passed, would seriously damage the free and open Internet, including Wikipedia.

This will be the first time the English Wikipedia has ever staged a public protest of this nature, and it’s a decision that wasn’t lightly made. Here’s how it’s been described by the three Wikipedia administrators who formally facilitated the community’s discussion. From the public statement, signed by User:NuclearWarfare, User:Risker and User:Billinghurst:

It is the opinion of the English Wikipedia community that both of these bills, if passed, would be devastating to the free and open web.

Over the course of the past 72 hours, over 1800 Wikipedians have joined together to discuss proposed actions that the community might wish to take against SOPA and PIPA. This is by far the largest level of participation in a community discussion ever seen on Wikipedia, which illustrates the level of concern that Wikipedians feel about this proposed legislation. The overwhelming majority of participants support community action to encourage greater public action in response to these two bills. Of the proposals considered by Wikipedians, those that would result in a “blackout” of the English Wikipedia, in concert with similar blackouts on other websites opposed to SOPA and PIPA, received the strongest support.

On careful review of this discussion, the closing administrators note the broad-based support for action from Wikipedians around the world, not just from within the United States. The primary objection to a global blackout came from those who preferred that the blackout be limited to readers from the United States, with the rest of the world seeing a simple banner notice instead. We also noted that roughly 55% of those supporting a blackout preferred that it be a global one, with many pointing to concerns about similar legislation in other nations.

In making this decision, Wikipedians will be criticized for seeming to abandon neutrality to take a political position. That’s a real, legitimate issue. We want people to trust Wikipedia, not worry that it is trying to propagandize them.

But although Wikipedia’s articles are neutral, its existence is not. As Wikimedia Foundation board member Kat Walsh wrote on one of our mailing lists recently,

We depend on a legal infrastructure that makes it possible for us to operate. And we depend on a legal infrastructure that also allows other sites to host user-contributed material, both information and expression. For the most part, Wikimedia projects are organizing and summarizing and collecting the world’s knowledge. We’re putting it in context, and showing people how to make to sense of it.

But that knowledge has to be published somewhere for anyone to find and use it. Where it can be censored without due process, it hurts the speaker, the public, and Wikimedia. Where you can only speak if you have sufficient resources to fight legal challenges, or, if your views are pre-approved by someone who does, the same narrow set of ideas already popular will continue to be all anyone has meaningful access to.

The decision to shut down the English Wikipedia wasn’t made by me; it was made by editors, through a consensus decision-making process. But I support it.

Like Kat and the rest of the Wikimedia Foundation Board, I have increasingly begun to think of Wikipedia’s public voice, and the goodwill people have for Wikipedia, as a resource that wants to be used for the benefit of the public. Readers trust Wikipedia because they know that despite its faults, Wikipedia’s heart is in the right place. It’s not aiming to monetize their eyeballs or make them believe some particular thing, or sell them a product. Wikipedia has no hidden agenda: it just wants to be helpful.

That’s less true of other sites. Most are commercially motivated: their purpose is to make money. That doesn’t mean they don’t have a desire to make the world a better place—many do!—but it does mean that their positions and actions need to be understood in the context of conflicting interests.

My hope is that when Wikipedia shuts down on January 18, people will understand that we’re doing it for our readers. We support everyone’s right to freedom of thought and freedom of expression. We think everyone should have access to educational material on a wide range of subjects, even if they can’t pay for it. We believe in a free and open Internet where information can be shared without impediment. We believe that new proposed laws like SOPA—and PIPA, and other similar laws under discussion inside and outside the United States—don’t advance the interests of the general public. You can read a very good list of reasons to oppose SOPA and PIPA here, from the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

Why is this a global action, rather than US-only? And why now, if some American legislators appear to be in tactical retreat on SOPA?

The reality is that we don’t think SOPA is going away, and PIPA is still quite active. Moreover, SOPA and PIPA are just indicators of a much broader problem. All around the world, we’re seeing the development of legislation seeking to regulate the Internet in other ways while hurting our online freedoms. Our concern extends beyond SOPA and PIPA: they are just part of the problem. We want the Internet to remain free and open, everywhere, for everyone.

Make your voice heard!

Bookmark with Facebook Share on Twitter Share on reddit.com Share on Digg.com

On January 18, we hope you’ll agree with us, and will do what you can to make your own voice heard.

Sue Gardner,
Executive Director, Wikimedia Foundation

Source: English_Wikipedia_anti-SOPA_blackout

[KillaCrab]

wow the corporations are really going at it.. trying to earn money from everything

[bishop]

@killa,

Yes, the Wiki shutdown is true.

But I believe the Wiki shutdown is not the issue. But rather "why" websites such as Wiki is doing what it is doing.

The reason for the 24-hour shutdown is to protest the United States led initiative to pass a bill making Online Piracy a crime.

This means that wesites that sponsors File Swaping and Free Streaming will be prosecuted for Piracy.

The consequenc is that those who regulary visits sites such as these will no longer be able to get "free music".

And worse, NO MORE FREE PORN.



So the question is you For or Against SOPA. (Stop On-line Piracy Act)

[DeusExMachina]

I am glad SOPA got (indefinitely) shelved. I am wary of anything that presumes one's guilt without any trial.

[ControlG]

And worse, NO MORE FREE PORN.

and where is the land of the free that they are calling

[bishop]

and where is the land of the free that they are calling

Kohai..

Violation of Intellectual Property rights is not covered by Free Speech.

[XellosMoon]

reddit going down for a day... i will never survive

[suave]

Di na pala applicable sa panahon ngayon ang SHARE your blessings.

[bishop]

Di na pala applicable sa panahon ngayon ang SHARE your blessings.

If you wrote a song and record companies are going to pay you a royalty of P100 petot each time your song is downloaded, would you like to share it for free?

[suave]

If you wrote a song and record companies are going to pay you a royalty of P100 petot each time your song is downloaded, would you like to share it for free?

of chors nut.... ano ako bale? hehehe.

pero sa Taiwan kung saan talamak ang piracy eh nakaisip ng ibang paraan ang mga manager, taartits at songers para kumita... bumabawi sila sa kita nila sa endorsements.
so kumikita pa rin.

and if i'm the songwriter, i will see to it na di ako aasa sa royalty para kumita. Dapat mag-adapt ako sa bilis ng takbo ng teknolihiya.

ang file sharing, IMO, ay para lang ding humiram ka sa kapitbahay mo ng vinyl record / cassette tape / dibidi. Di ka bumili pero na enjoy mo pa rin.

my point, di natin mapipigilang ipatronize ng masa ang piracy hanggat may namimirata, pwedeng rasong praktikal o pwedeng sa iba pang rason. trabaho nating mga mamimili na makakuha ng produkto sa pinakamura o di kaya ay libreng paraan.

Bibili ka pa ba kung may libre naman? op chors nut.... ano ako bale?

So basically, it's the consumer's practicality vs. the owner's IP rights. Unfortunately pwedeng iisang tao lang sila.

So timbang timbang na lang tayo siguro.

[bishop]

pero sa Taiwan kung saan talamak ang piracy eh nakaisip ng ibang paraan ang mga manager, taartits at songers para kumita... bumabawi sila sa kita nila sa endorsements.
so kumikita pa rin.

and if i'm the songwriter, i will see to it na di ako aasa sa royalty para kumita. Dapat mag-adapt ako sa bilis ng takbo ng teknolihiya.

ang file sharing, IMO, ay para lang ding humiram ka sa kapitbahay mo ng vinyl record / cassette tape / dibidi. Di ka bumili pero na enjoy mo pa rin.

Ibahin ko yung tanong:

Papayag ka ba na habang nag hahanap ka ng ibang para-an para kumita, o kagaya na sinabi mo, "mag adapt".. yung mga kasamahan mong songwriters na protektado ng Intellectual Property Rights ay kumikita ng P100 petot kada download?

Ang term "File Sharing" ay para sakin isa lamang pinagandang pangalan sa pagnanakaw.

Pag na download mo na ang isang kanta mo sa Computer mo, hindi mo naman to binabalik sa Kompanya, di ba? So hindi 'to pareho sa "paghihiram". Ang isang baga na hiniram, ay binabalik sa may-ari.

Di ba?

[suave]

sir bishop para yatang mas akma na borrowing ang itawag sa sinasabi mong dapat ka magsoli.

kapag sharing kasi eh depende sa gamit na isini share, may mga gamit na dapat isoli kapag sini share at may gamit na saýo na talaga.

anyways, sa tanong mo na papayag ba ako.

Bilang songwriter. Syempre hindi.
Pero bilang consumer. Syempre oo.

Kaya nga sabi ko, titimbangin na lang ng tao yan. Alin ba ang mas mahalaga ang kikitain ko sa pagiging songwriter ko o ang matitipid ko sa pagiging consumer ko.