Peter Miller peter.miller at itoworld.com
Thu Aug 20 10:12:38 UTC 2009

On 20 Aug 2009, at 11:05, Nick Black wrote:

> Grant,
> I think that the OSM-F membership list should be available for anyone
> to request for their own personal use, in line with the UK Companies
> Act.
> My understanding and the understanding of the Board is that because
> the OSM-F is not Data Protection Act registered, we are tightly
> constrained by what we can do with a membership list.  Until last
> night I did not have access to the list.  We can only use it for
> purposes of membership - sending membership reminders is about the
> extent of the actions we can take.  I personally think this is sub
> optimal, which is why I'm working with the other OSM-F Board members
> to get clarification on the DPA and other regulations.
> I think the members should have access to the membership list and the
> information that can be inferred from it, but this has to be done
> through the proper channels.

The Foundation is legally required to register under the Data  
Protection Act 1998 and failure to do so is a criminal offence:-
"Notification is a statutory requirement and every organisation that  
processes personal information must notify the Information  
Commissioner’s Office (ICO), unless they are exempt. Failure to notify  
is a criminal offence.


Notification is also very simple and something you can do online here:-



> On 20 Aug 2009, at 10:28, Grant Slater wrote:
>> 2009/8/20 Nick Black <nick at blacksworld.net>:
>>> The unauthorized use of Foundation membership details to pursue a
>>> personal
>>> agenda - membership details that I have personally been arguing
>>> long and
>>> hard within the Foundation and the Board should be released
>>> publicly - is a
>>> new low.
>> Please Nick this is hardly unauthorised. Frederik is an administrator
>> of the OSMF talk list and he has the best interests of a health OSMF
>> at heart. He has not released any personal information. As you have
>> point out the membership list is meant to be a matter of public  
>> record
>> already but it is not yet due to failings of the OSMF board.
>> How else do you believe this matter would have been raised with the
>> members? Or do you believe that CloudMade's significant stake in OSMF
>> membership is not a cause for concern?
> No, I don't think it is cause for concern.  Neither do many of the
> other people who have replied to this thread.  I'll only briefly
> repeat myself: CloudMade staff are free to vote as they choose, just
> as everyone else in the community is.
>> / Grant
> --
> Nick Black
> twitter.com/nick_b
> nick at blacksworld.net
> _______________________________________________
> osmf-talk mailing list
> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk

More information about the osmf-talk mailing list