[Noisebridge-discuss] Should NB mirror WikiLeaks?

[Shannon Lee]

First, due to Wikileaks' nature, I believe that in this case, adding a
Wikileaks mirror cannot be seen as anything but a political statement -- a
vote in favor of WIkileaks, essentially.

Second, this is a charged enough environment that this sort of regulation is
likely to be interpreted extremely loosely.

Third, we can't afford to fight even an egregiously wrong decision on this.

Again, I think that putting up a Wikileaks mirror is an awesome thing to do,
and many Noisebridgers have, but I don't thing Noisebridge should do so.

--S

On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 9:59 AM, Sai <sai at saizai.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 11:50 AM, Shannon Lee <shannon at scatter.com> wrote:
> > Noisebridge itself is, as I understand it, enjoined from
> making political statements and/or donations, which I am certain this wold
> be perceived as.
>
> You are IMO incorrect. The ban applies only to *partisan* political
> activity. Julian Assange and Wikileaks in general have no
> participation in US elections. E.g. the EFF routinely engages in
> political speech, lobbying, issue education, etc - but is
> party-neutral.
>
> Merely mirroring information without actually advocating for anything
> is even more neutral.
>
>
> http://www.irs.gov/charities/charitable/article/0,,id=163395,00.html
>
> "Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations
> are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating
> in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in
> opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions
> to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal
> or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in
> opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the
> prohibition against political campaign activity.  Violating this
> prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status
> and the imposition of certain excise taxes.
>
> Certain activities or expenditures may not be prohibited depending on
> the facts and circumstances.  For example, certain voter education
> activities (including presenting public forums and publishing voter
> education guides) conducted in a non-partisan manner do not constitute
> prohibited political campaign activity. In addition, other activities
> intended to encourage people to participate in the electoral process,
> such as voter registration and get-out-the-vote drives, would not be
> prohibited political campaign activity if conducted in a non-partisan
> manner.
>
> On the other hand, voter education or registration activities with
> evidence of bias that (a) would favor one candidate over another; (b)
> oppose a candidate in some manner; or (c) have the effect of favoring
> a candidate or group of candidates, will constitute prohibited
> participation or intervention."
>
> See more:
> http://www.irs.gov/charities/charitable/article/0,,id=179750,00.html
>
> - Sai
>



-- 
Shannon Lee
(503) 539-3700

"Any sufficiently analyzed magic is indistinguishable from science."
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20101207/0be9fde0/attachment-0003.html>