[Osmf-talk] Draft New Corporate Membership Tiers

Simon Poole simon at poole.ch
Thu Apr 28 10:51:13 UTC 2016


Given that we currently have a majority of legal professionals on the
LWG and those that are not (legal professionals) are well versed in
reading legal documents, and it definitely wouldn't be an issue in
sending back legalese if so required, there doesn't seem to be a real
existing problem waiting to be solved (with money). In particular the
LWG has not been instructed to not answer questions when they originate
with corporate lawyers and has been doing that, naturally, without
checking for their membership status.

Now you could argue that by providing such a service you could offload a
substantial workload from our volunteers, but to achieve that it would
boil down to not answering the bulk of questions from non-paying
individuals and corporate OSM users. Something that I believe would be
very very difficult to defend for an open project.

Simon


Am 28.04.2016 um 11:34 schrieb Frederik Ramm:
> Hi,
>
> On 04/28/2016 11:11 AM, Tom Hughes wrote:
>> So what exactly are you suggesting that corporate members get over and 
>> above what anybody else gets?
> I'd say that the add-on here (over and above what anyone gets for free)
> is a translation into legalese.
>
> Today, if someone writes to legal-questions they will get a response but
> it will not be a response from someone who speaks legalese and if
> they're unlucky then the person responding might also need a couple
> iterations to actually understand what is being asked when it's in legalese.
>
> The service offered to corporate members is that they can send their
> question in legalese, and a lawyer will look at it and then ask {board,
> LWG, legal-questions ...} about the situation (in normal language) and
> will convert the response into legalese and send it back.
>
> The service offered to corporate members is *not* that OSMF will
> suddenly commit to things it wouldn't normally commit to when asked by
> someone else. Our lawyer would not be able to, for example, analyse a
> business model and say whether it is compatible with the license or it
> isn't; there will not be a seal of "OSMF lawyer approved business model"
> that corporate members can buy. But our lawyer can help *their* lawyer
> identify the sections of the license that might be crucial to their
> business model. Ultimately it's their call - just like for everyone else.
>
> Bye
> Frederik
>


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/attachments/20160428/76fc37c6/attachment.sig>


More information about the osmf-talk mailing list