[OSM-legal-talk] 23rd Dec board meeting

Peter Miller peter.miller at itoworld.com
Wed Jan 28 19:19:16 GMT 2009


>>
>>
>> Does Nick Black have a 'substantial' shareholding in CloudMade? If  
>> so I
>> think this should be noted, otherwise 'none' would be clearer than no
>> entry. Also for consistency with other entries Nick's entry should  
>> list
>> 'other directorships' not 'directorships'; there is no need to  
>> repeat the
>> OSM Foundation directorship.
>
>
> Nick's entry has been corrected, thanks for pointing it out.

Thank you, that makes more sense now.
>
>
>>
>>
>> I am less pleased that the dates were chosen by the board without  
>> checking
>> with others (including ITO) who they know are keen to attend,  
>> especially as
>> the dates clash with a holiday booked by one of our key people  
>> months ago!
>> ITO has made a big investment in OSM development and does expect to  
>> be
>> included in and does wish to attend.
>
>
> The dates were suggestions only, for the benefit of the Board. Nick is
> organising and facilitating the event personally and confirms he  
> will be
> communicating plans to the community for discussion in the usual way.
>

It is reassuring the know that Nick will discuss dates with the  
community on this one.


>>
>> TradeMarks and Domains
>> I note that the transfer of the trademarks has still not happened (I
>> checked at the IPO last night). The minutes seem to confuse the  
>> process of
>> transferring the application with the process of progressing the
>> applications themselves.
>
>
> The November Board meeting minutes confirm the agreement that the  
> Transfer
> of the trademark applications to the OSMF from Steve will take  
> place. The
> December meeting reported that OSMF had started a dialogue with the
> solicitors processing the applications. It is correct that the actual
> transfer paperwork has not yet been completed, but this will happen  
> in due
> course.

Can I politely request that you get your legal guys to pull their  
finger out and complete the simple transfer forms, send them to the  
IPO and then we can put this particular sad saga to bed and forget it.

>>
>>
>> I note that in both the Nov25th and Dec23rd minutes there has been  
>> the
>> comment: "Steve to send email to legal-talk with update of  
>> progress." To be
>> clear, not posts have been made by SteveC on legal-talk since Nov25th
>> except two that rubbished my suggestion that there is any reason to  
>> be
>> nervous about trademark applications in his own person name.
>
>
> The meeting minutes reflect the position as at the time of the last  
> meeting
> in December. Since then further discussions and meetings have taken  
> place
> culminating in the two posts that Mikel has made on behalf of the  
> Board in
> the last couple of weeks. These list posts reflect the current  
> situation.
>

I think it is fair to say that we are still many questions on the list  
that could be answered, however  Mikel is posting a lot more than was  
the case which is a step in the right direction, thank you.

>
>>
>> Fyi, we are speaking with a professor we know at CASA, UCL to ask  
>> if there
>> was a problem with bandwidth as far as he knows. He is checking  
>> this and
>> will get back to us and we will report to the group. I think UCL  
>> should be
>> very keen to hang onto this project. What if TBL was able to use his
>> connections at MIT or Southampton to get a joint hosting arrangement
>> between UCL and somewhere else?
>
> The OpenStreetMap Foundation is responsible for the servers of the
> OpenStreetMap project and we or our nominated representatives shall  
> be the
> sole point of contact for any communications with existing hosting
> providers.

I would not dream of implying that I had any official mandate from the  
foundation in relation to the hosting of servers, however I fail to  
see how OSM can remain a secret and below the radar as it continues to  
grow.

Fyi, we did talk to very senior people within UCL who were in  
appropriate positions to give an informed policy positions as I  
mentioned in my past post. I spoke to them again today and was  
reassured to hear that they welcomed the success of OSM, were proud to  
be part of it and would have a very high tolerance of bandwidth.

It is not my intention to maintain a close communication with the  
department, but I will be interested to hear how the relationship  
between OSM and UCL develops.

>
>
>>
>> Is there not a large potential conflict of interest between SteveC in
>> relation to his driving this change within the Foundation and also  
>> being a
>> director of a company that could well benefit from the OSM project  
>> not
>> offering a full set of services? I don't know, but I certainly  
>> don't have
>> the information to feel comfortable with this initiative until we  
>> have some
>> more facts available to us.
>
> Steve chairs the Technical working group but it is the group as a  
> whole that
> recommends or decides as appropriate on technical matters.
>
> The mission statement /objectives for the Foundation (3.1 of the  
> Memorandum
> of Association) states "OpenStreetMap Foundation is dedicated to  
> encouraging
> the growth, development and distribution of free geospatial data and  
> to
> providing geospatial data for anybody to use and share."
>
> Therefore OSMF is clear on what services constitute core services that
> support these objectives. Delivery of other services is not the
> responsibility of the OSMF but may be aspirations of the wider OSM
> community.

It seems that some policy decisions have been made by the foundation  
in July/Sept 08 that will result in the project cutting services.

I also note that in the minutes of the September board meeting it was  
agreed that the board would publish some information on the proposed  
changes. Did that happen? I couldn't find anything about it on talk.  
The community were of course not able to see the minutes of these  
meetings at all until December 08 which is not very satisfactory.

I appreciate that the board members are volunteers and time is  
limited, but can I suggest that it would be appropriate for the  
Foundation to publish a paper on the subject and give us the benefit  
of its recommendations.


Regards,



Peter
>
>
>>
>> Local Chapters / Affiliations
>> no comments
>>
>> OSMF Membership/website
>> Can we have a blog page on the foundation website where you can post
>> important announcements and people can comment? I think it would be  
>> a great
>> help.
>>
>> I am copying this to the secretary.
>>
>>
>> Have a good weekend,
>>
>>
>>
>> Peter
>>
>
>
>
> Andy Robinson
> Secretary
> OpenStreetMap Foundation
> 0777 553 7872
> andy at osmfoundation.org
>
> Name & Registered Office:
> Openstreetmap Foundation
> 16 Oakfield Glade
> Weybridge
> Surrey
> KT13 9DP
> United Kingdom
> A company limited by guarantee, registered in England and Wales.
> Registration No. 05912761.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> legal-talk mailing list
> legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk





More information about the legal-talk mailing list