Talk:German internet watchdog to remove URLs to 'Virgin Killer' from search engines

OR
All I can find are German sources, all which are easily translated in Google. That said, Google really sucks at a lot of the translating. I also e-mailed the FSM for a statement, though I am not sure I will get one. Not sure how to contact the BPjM though. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 01:19, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I got a response from the FSM. I am afraid this article, if there will even be one, will drastically change. I will have more info soon. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 18:12, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I wrote back the FSM for clarification on their answers as German media is reporting something different from what the FSM told me. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 22:40, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I have forwarded my correspondents with the FSM to scoop. I am awaiting replies from the other government entity. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 14:42, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I got a reply from the BPjM, which I sent through scoop. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 15:30, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Since I cannot find the link to the WMF PR today, I am posting it from scoop here: "December 9, 2008 - Wikimedia Foundation applauds IWF decision to reverse Wikipedia censorship in the United Kingdom' Removal from Internet blacklist will also allow UK Wikipedians to resume editing

San Francisco CA, December 9 - Earlier today the Internet Watch Foundation (IWF), a non-profit agency tasked with preventing access to potentially illegal internet content, reversed its ruling earlier this week that prevented over 95% of UK internet users from accessing an article about an album by a German rock band, The Scorpions. As a result, UK Wikipedia users were unable to access all of the editing functions on Wikipedia. With this decision, the IWF has removed Wikipedia from its internet blacklist.

"We are grateful to the IWF for making this swift decision, and to thousands of internet users from around the world for their outpouring of support," said Sue Gardner, Executive Director of the Wikimedia Foundation. "Millions of Britons now have access to all of Wikipedia, and volunteers can resume their important editing work. The Wikimedia Foundation greatly admires the work of our volunteers - they care deeply about Wikipedia and are the first responders in dealing with potentially illegal content on Wikipedia." Gardner added that both the Foundation and its community of users "work hard to be responsive and responsible when it comes to legitimate legal concerns."

Mike Godwin, General Counsel for the Wikimedia Foundation stated: "We recognize the good intentions of Internet watch groups, including their focus on blocking and discouraging illegal content. Nevertheless, this incident underscores the need for transparency and accountability in the processes of the Internet Watch Foundation and similar bodies around the world."

Added Godwin, "In the long run, monitoring groups need to develop a public set of 'best practices.' These best practices should, at a minimum, decrease the impact on content found to be lawful, acknowledge the context in which the content at issue occurs, and be maximally transparent both to service providers and to individual users. There should be no false or misleading error messages when online censorship does occur."

The Wikimedia Foundation had criticized the the lack of transparency in the IWF's decision making and appeal process, as well as the suspension of editing functions that resulted following the censorship. UK Wikipedia editors account for over 25% of all editing activity on the English Wikipedia.

The Wikimedia Foundation is open to dialog on these issues with the IWF and other Internet watch groups."

Copyedit not included
I made some draft changes which really are sorely needed, but no one has "sighted" them yet. There's a missing word, a capitalization problem, and other issues.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:06, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Technically non published articles are not supposed to be sighted, and the edits of individuals who don't have editor status cannot see the changes made. But because I missed up a while back and accidentally sighted the article, I did so this time. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 23:10, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Which search engines?
The URLs to the album cover will be blocked from being displayed or searched in search results in the German search engine service, which according to Winter "are members of the FSM". Is Google.de, Yahoo, MSN... among them? What major search engines in Germany are members of the FSM? GeorgeII (talk) 19:34, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I am not sure, and was not told specifics. I am going to say, based on the e-mails that all search engines in Germany are part of the FSM network. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 19:43, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I was going to ask the same thing. It's about the only part of the article that's confusing. It makes it seem like all search engines in Germany (which in itself doesn't makes sense) will block these URLs. Weird stuff. —75.168.163.246 19:53, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Oops, forgot to sign in. That was me. —Calebrw (talk) 19:54, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Not really...it would be, I think, like China, where the search engines and such are filtered through the module, then dispersed to the net. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 20:03, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

utterly crap

 * "The BPjM has no knowledge of any measures being taken to block the depiction of the album cover from German search engines," said Mit freundlichen Grüßen, a spokesperson for the BPjM to Wikinews. The spokesperson also added that there have been no complaints filed with the BPjM regarding the cover.

"Mit freundlichen Grüßen" is the German way of saying "with kind regards". The remaining article is almost as bad as this part, it mixes/confuses the responsibility of the organisations involved. -- 78.54.132.140 21:59, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually it doesn't. The FSM claims that the BPjM is going to ban the URL of the image in question. The BPjM denies that claim, saying they have not receive a complaint. Fixed the name BTW as I just copied the wrong line. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 23:22, 12 December 2008 (UTC)