Wikipedia:SOPA initiative/UN

The United Nations (UN) is an international organization whose stated aims are facilitating cooperation in international law, international security, economic development, social progress, human rights, and achievement of world peace.

Proposal

To send a strongly worded letter from or on behalf of Wikipedia (Wikimedia Foundation), to the United Nations to pressure the United States to promptly retract the proposed enactment of the Stop Online Piracy Act and PROTECT IP Act. As the United Nations is the governing body with 193 member states (all independent countries, with the exception of Vatican City), it has to power to enact laws that all members should abide by.

Letter

To Whom It May Concern;

The Wikimedia Foundation, the operator of Wikipedia, hereby requests on behalf of all Wikipedia editors and users, that the United Nations encourage the Government of the United States of America to promptly retract the proposed enactment of the Stop Online Piracy Act, also known as “SOPA”, and the PROTECT IP Act, also known as “PIPA”.

From our understanding, these two proposed laws will grant the Government of the United States of America the power to chastise and penalize website operators for user generated content. These two laws are an extension of the current Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) which is sufficient enough as is. However, the Government of the United States of America believes that there is a need for an extension without any external consultation. Previous laws, like the DMCA, were enacted based on international conferences on intellectual property. With the lack of external advice, the Government of the United States of America is making an incompetent action by proposing these laws.

Furthermore, The United States should not have the power to forcibly convict website operators of possible infringing copyright content. One false report can lead to a website being blocked and “blacked out” without a proper civil trial. Websites, like Wikipedia, have certain safeguards to stop possibly infringing copyright content, however, sometimes it takes longer to tag problem areas. These areas will likely be inappropriately tagged as copyright infringement and reported to the government. Wikipedia uses non-free use copyright images, audio, files and text for the sole purpose of commentary and other fair uses under the DMCA. These new laws, SOPA and PIPA, threaten the effectiveness of Wikipedia as a research tool that is used by millions daily.

Though, this law claims to protect the interests of intellectual property holders and it appears that this law will boost the economy. In the end, unfortunately, it will not. Information, technology and the Internet are all booming tertiary industries that will ultimately be exterminated with the proposal of these new laws. These laws not only affect Wikipedia and the United States, but affect all websites and the entire World.

The Government of the United States of America has already abused their power by seizing and shutting down Megaupload.com and arresting the operators unjustly without giving the operators time to defend themselves.

We thank you in advance for your consideration.

Sincerely,
The Wikimedia Foundation
The English Wikipedia
The Editors and Users of Wikipedia

Discussion

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Oppose. Failed proposal; made in good faith

---

Whenaxis about | talk 03:02, 22 January 2012 (UTC)}}

1. Support Whenaxis about | talk Omit/repeal
2. Oppose that this is even up for a vote. I probably wouldn't support any more political activities from this project, and I certainly don't think the UN is the group we need to be looking towards for our salvation. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 02:06, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
3. No way in hell: Stop signing my name to this crap. Not all Wikipedia editors oppose SOPA.—Kww(talk) 02:07, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
4. Oppose The precedent has been sent now for activism but that doesn't mean a political campaign I considered dubious from the beginning has to be continued.--Brian Dell (talk) 02:20, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
5. Oppose. Both PIPA and SOPA have been withdrawn, and the United Nations has absolutely no role in international intellectual property issues (or, indeed, in national ones). We've exhausted all the leeway we have for political action with the blackout, and did so with good intentions and good results. The result, however, is that if we want "Wikipedia disagrees with something" to mean something, we have to use it only when necessary. Protesting junked legislation and complaining about the shutdown of a site that was, actually, committing crimes, is not something that falls under "necessary". Ironholds (talk) 02:27, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
6. Oppose as Ironholds says, we need to keep these actions rare or they'll lose their impact. Also, the UN has no role in lobbying for or against US legislation, making such an action pretty futile. Imzadi 1979 → 02:34, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
7. Oppose in the strongest possible terms. January 18 is over. Awareness: raised. Huzza! But if we want to maintain our credibility we need to stop pulling political stunts. If you want to send a personal letter to the UN, more power to you. Don't put Wikipedia's name on it.Braincricket (talk) 02:36, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

To keep it in one place...

I've started another discussion here. There's no way this should even be here, and that's coming from someone who supported the blackout. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 02:13, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.