And Wiki Wasn’t Down

18 Jan

In April 2010 the UK government rushed through the Digitial Economy Bill, which effectively stopped P2P downloads in the UK in order to combat the terror of Online Piracy.  And Wiki Wasn’t Down.

In May 2011 the EU implemented the EU Cookie Directive that made all sorts of restrictions be put on harmless cookies (see here).  And Wiki Wasn’t Down.

In January 2012 EMI started suing the Irish state for not provisioning for implementing a law that would allow them to sue any ISP that didn’t do exactly what they wanted.  And Wiki Wasn’t Down.

Now the US is simply proposing legislation and Jimmy Wales has put wiki down like a trigger happy stable owner. (God that’s a bad analogy)

Way to go on consistency Jimmy.

N.B. I know wiki isn’t really down and there are lots of ways round it and it’s only English Wiki anyway, so English speaking people can hassle friends and relatives in the US about this. Apparently no one in the US has relatives or friends outside the US who aren’t English speaking as far as Jimmy Wales is concerned, or maybe the people who run wiki couldn’t figure out how to put messages up in other languages, that speaks to their technical skills, maybe they couldn’t manage to translate the message, so there could be anything in the other language sites because they can’t read them.  Odd isn’t it?

1 Comment

Posted by on January 18, 2012 in Uncategorized


One response to “And Wiki Wasn’t Down

  1. David Bennett

    January 24, 2012 at 9:43 am

    Wikipedia is US based – ( and it took a lot of effort to get opposition mobilised against SOPA and RIPA.

    Where was the mobilised effort against the UK legislation?

    I recall first reading about the British Telecom Newzbin case in MacUser and almost nothing else anywhere. I just googled for it and found out that Sky was ordered to block Newzbin in December.

    I am not with either of those providers and had no difficulty accessing the site. I am not a Newzbin user, but I don’t want it hidden from me either.

    But I 100% agree with the principle that third parties (ISPs) should not be the target or the means of removing sites. If the site is breaking the law, use the law against the site itself.

    The nub of the matter seems to be about where the line is drawn and about what should be taken down at source and what should not.

    And that is exactly one of the reasons that SOPA and RIPA were so strongly opposed. Either of these Acts would allow far too much power to objectors to kill sites.

    I wrote about ISP blocking in England at the time of the BT case, but really – who is up in arms? Who?

    Of course it is a threat to civil liberties, but it seems to be the way this side of the Atlantic (I am in Scotland) to see fail to see essential rights and liberties as an entitlement.

    I wrote about the contrast between US and UK attitudes to ‘entitlement’ here:


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: