<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1251">
</head>
<body>
<p><font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">Andy, Frederik, et al,<br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">OSMF won't fail, simply
because the "worst-case" scenario is reversion to the 100%
do-ocracy of volunteers, which has its drawbacks but is doable,
has been sustainable for nearly 16 years, and is very low cost.
That particular downside risk is very small, as in very close to
zero. The question is whether there are improvements to the
platform within our reach, for which funds could be raised, that
would not undermine the volunteer spirit of the OSM community
and thereby to endanger the project. The Board is listening to
all voices, not only the loudest, and we encourage all with
information and perspectives to share, to speak up.</font></p>
<p><font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">cheers,<br>
apm </font><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 8/5/2020 8:14 AM, Frederik Ramm
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:af99737b-a535-d4e1-58c9-f9650ddf0991@remote.org">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">Hi,
On 05.08.20 11:26, Andy Allan wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">Because OSMF simply cannot fail. It holds rights on the database that
are not and cannot be available to any other organisation. It holds
the copyrights and domains. It holds the user accounts. If something
goes seriously wrong with OSMF, there is no way to recover
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
Can/should we take steps that would make it easier to recover from a
total failure of OSMF, instead of trying to ensure that OSMF never fails?
For example, regarding the holding of rights; each contributor has given
the OSMF certain rights through the contributor agreement but could the
OSMF pass these rights on to another organisation? The contributor
agreement does not say that the right is not transferable.
Perhaps the OSMF could concentrate on the "operative business" - having
members, collecting money, running servers, employing staff, etc. - and
there could be a nondescript charity somewhere that holds domain names,
trademarks, and database rights.
Or the other way round, possibly you meant that by "arms-length
organisations", that the OSMF becomes the nondescript charity that only
has a couple of trademarks and rights, and all the operative business is
run by the "OpenStreetMap Services Ltd." or whatever, which would be the
organisation that can fail without tearing down the project.
Bye
Frederik
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>