To be honest, I'd rather see you set up here in Canada
Agree with Sargemisfit. Set up any new data centers beyond the sticky electronic fingers of youknowwho Not sure if Canada would cut it.
Mars data centres are expensive
Check out http://www.infobunker.com/ it takes a warrant to get into the place. It's an old cold war bunker that was part of the ATT Looking Glass project
Came here to say "Came here to say, I'd rather see you set up in not-USA", but Canada would do.
Much, much better privacy laws, eh. Go Jennifer Stoddart!
Not in the datacenter business though I worked in them for almost 40 years.
I would love to be able to respond to the RFP but now I'm a sole proprietor - sort of beyond my scaling ability
I would like to see you discuss this with IBM, however, as a possible application of virtual Linux servers on the z/VM virtualization technology, on top of their z/architecture machines. IBM claims you can run 500+ virtual servers on a box and have great environmental savings doing it - I think it's probably true, too because I worked on a small mainframe supporting multiple agencies and its power usage rate was only 3kWH. I think Wikimedia kind of meshes with their "Smarter Planet" initiative, too!
The key thing that matters to Wikimedia is probably fair use and libel laws. On this front, Canada is not an option, nor is most of the Western world except for the US and possibly Israel (who have adapted and expanded on the US fair use laws). Wikimedia would have to be completely overhauled if they wanted to move from the US, and most of it would be for the worse.
Actually, Canada has similar fair use and libel laws as the US. We tend to abide by the DMCA, though our laws are actually Notice and Notice. All appropriate sites are deemed safe harbours, too. To keep things simple, since I am not a lawyer, our laws began with British roots, but we do so much business with the US that ours have changed to make our relations with the US easier.
The biggest difference between our Canada and the US are those three basic Rights. In the US, its Right to Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness. In Canada its Right to Life, Liberty and Security of Person. We have stricter anti-Hate laws. Groups like Westboro Baptist have a much harder time here. We're very much more protective of our Rights to Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Personal Expression.
There are other considerations, too. When the recession hit, our economy rebounded faster due, in part, to different banking regulations. We have stricter consumer protection laws. Free universal health care and education.
Yeah, I get it. You think Canada is great. This has nothing to do with the discussion at hand which is libel laws and fair use. Canada is awesome in many respects, but not there. You really do need to research your laws (fair use doesn't exist in Canada, you only have fair dealing).
The US also has the SPEECH Act which prevents libel tourism (which comes from Canada and England, and never from the US). I'm not trying to buoy up the US and insult Canada. But in these areas, Canada lags really, really far behind the US.
Oh, and by the way, do you know the truth? The concept I mean. That is not a defense to libel in Canada. In Canada a defendant must prove a statement is true. In the US, a plaintiff must prove it is false (and if that can't be done, the case is dismissed). Here is an example:
Actually, all the rest that I added does have to do with the discussion. Any organization has employees. So, things like health care are a factor. When it comes to the other points, well, that's why I am not a lawyer. What I do know is what I have read about the various cases that make it into the public media. As to which is better, well, that too is subjective and each has a bias in favour of their Home
Are you kidding me? It isn't subjective. Read the laws and how they are implemented, for fucks sake. You don't have to be a lawyer to understand this. And if you don't have the time to read up and learn the details, perhaps you shouldn't have commented on this.
Yeah, they are the laws. But which ones are better IS subjective. Don't confuse better with just. As for implementation, I see articles every other day about US copyright trolls and US patent trolls ripping people off. US, not Canadian.
And what does this have to do with the subject at hand? Can you keep on topic?
If you are a nonprofit organization that wants to use immense volumes of copyrighted information under fair use and publish articles without having to deal with libel laws, the issue isn't subjective. It is obvious. If you do it in Canada, you would have to be far more cautious and you would probably need to get formal permission to be safe. In the US you can do so with substantial legal protection. It is obvious that you haven't read the articles and are still trying to comment. Stop. Read. And rethink. Come back to me only after you understand the legal issues facing Wikimedia and they way they have to operate. If you don't want to read about the legal issues here, then don't bother to comment. You will only be wasting both of our time.
In Canada, such a site is automatically granted safe harbour protection.
And I will make whatever comments I wish. You don't like them, tough, don't respond.
Oh, & as an FYI, I truly don't have the time to read those links you provided. At the moment, that is.
Examples of the same scope and content as Wikimedia?
Fine. I don't expect you to read them immediately. I do expect that when you read them you will be able to argue the relevant provisions better. As I said before, I have great respect for Canadian jurisprudence. And there are some immensely fucked up things about US copyright law. But the US does truly excel in fair use and libel laws. There really is a reason Wikimedia hosts in the US, and it isn't because they love 'America' so much.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.