Leading Internet asshole god says "Wikimedia is A-OK"
Posted: Sat Mar 10, 2018 10:47 pm
Wikimedia's transparency report is a joy by Cory Doctorow, a man so pathetic and conflicted that he has a very long and very mean Dramatica artlcle.
Those bastards have lied about copyright, DMCA and government issues before. Why should we take Doctorow's word at face value and give the WMF any "benefit of the doubt"? EVERYTHING THEY DO IS DOUBTFUL. Because lying and dissembling are hard-baked into their culture.
Knowing how they used ignorance and "well that was the volunteer community's fault" and outright lies before, it's impossible for me to accept their claim of only twelve DMCA claims during all of 2017. Other major American-based websites, like Facebook, Twitter, Google and Yahoo, get millions of DMCA complaints every year. Compare this to the WMF statement.
Also, I suspect the Foundation simply ignores many DMCA claims, provided the complainers aren't large and wealthy media corporations who could afford to sue the WMF in open court (which would be really embarrassing, esp. if the plaintiff decides to start revealing mountains of Wiki-Dirt that have accumulated since 2003). Their DMCA calculations are made to insure the safety of the WMF and its rotten petty little cult following, and not copyright holders, nor even Wikipedia content.
Look at the DMCA categories on the WMF website. They only raise more questions than they answer. Each one has been carefully assembled by known Wiki-Liars: Maggie Dennis, Philippe Beaudette, and in the last 4 years James Alexander. Heavily involved since they started posting this stuff: German Wikipedia nerd and longtime Commons/Meta admin Steinsplitter, a deep insider who is almost never discussed.
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Category:DMCA_2017
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Category:DMCA_2016
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Category:DMCA_2015
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Category:DMCA_2014
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Category:DMCA_2013
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Category:DMCA_2012
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Category:DMCA_2011
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Category:DMCA_2009
(there was no listing for 2010 and there was nothing prior to 2009. No idea why.)
Compare this self-serving WMF shit to Levine's 2011 book Free Ride. You will see two very different versions of reality. Which is more likely to be accurate?
So Wikipedia's transparency report is something of a joy. I mean, how can you read this: "From July to December of 2017, we received 343 requests to alter or remove project content, seven of which came from government entities. Once again, we granted zero of these requests" and not rejoice?
Those bastards have lied about copyright, DMCA and government issues before. Why should we take Doctorow's word at face value and give the WMF any "benefit of the doubt"? EVERYTHING THEY DO IS DOUBTFUL. Because lying and dissembling are hard-baked into their culture.
Knowing how they used ignorance and "well that was the volunteer community's fault" and outright lies before, it's impossible for me to accept their claim of only twelve DMCA claims during all of 2017. Other major American-based websites, like Facebook, Twitter, Google and Yahoo, get millions of DMCA complaints every year. Compare this to the WMF statement.
Also, I suspect the Foundation simply ignores many DMCA claims, provided the complainers aren't large and wealthy media corporations who could afford to sue the WMF in open court (which would be really embarrassing, esp. if the plaintiff decides to start revealing mountains of Wiki-Dirt that have accumulated since 2003). Their DMCA calculations are made to insure the safety of the WMF and its rotten petty little cult following, and not copyright holders, nor even Wikipedia content.
Look at the DMCA categories on the WMF website. They only raise more questions than they answer. Each one has been carefully assembled by known Wiki-Liars: Maggie Dennis, Philippe Beaudette, and in the last 4 years James Alexander. Heavily involved since they started posting this stuff: German Wikipedia nerd and longtime Commons/Meta admin Steinsplitter, a deep insider who is almost never discussed.
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Category:DMCA_2017
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Category:DMCA_2016
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Category:DMCA_2015
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Category:DMCA_2014
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Category:DMCA_2013
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Category:DMCA_2012
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Category:DMCA_2011
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Category:DMCA_2009
(there was no listing for 2010 and there was nothing prior to 2009. No idea why.)
Compare this self-serving WMF shit to Levine's 2011 book Free Ride. You will see two very different versions of reality. Which is more likely to be accurate?