[Osmf-talk] Normal OSMF membership for mappers - is it active?

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 06.08.21 09:48, michael spreng wrote:
> By the way, I don't like the formulation "full" member that you chose.
> Normal members are governed by the UK companies act, which has severe
> privacy implications. Associate members are as fully OSMF members as the
> Normal ones, just avoiding the companies act. Of course that has also
> implications in slightly diminished voting capabilities: no vote on AoA
> changes.

I would like to underline that - the associate member category was not
created so that we could have "second class members", it was created so
that people who are more privacy-conscious could join the OSMF.

The Companies Act requires that the "company" (here, the OSMF) keeps a
register of members (here, "normal" members), with the following
information:

* real name and full address
* date when joined
* date when left

and this list - including the full addresses and names of all members -
must be made available "for inspection" to any other member of the OSMF
free of charge. The OSMF must also give a *copy* of this list to anyone
(member or non-member) who asks (but may require a fee for this).

(See https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/part/8/chapter/2 for
details)

This means that if you become a normal member, essentially your full
name and address and when you joined become public, and this information
is even retained after you leave the OSMF. Because this is enshrined in
the Companies Act, it trumps any data protection legislation -
essentially, by becoming a member of a limited company governed by the
UK companies act, you agree to these rules and if you don't like them,
don't become a member.

If we offer free "normal" membership to mappers of whom we, until that
point, know nothing more than their user name and email, they will still
have to submit their personal details if they want to become a normal
member. I don't know the penalties for falsifying this information but
the penalties for not complying with the membership list rules are quite
serious so I expect that in the long run the OSMF will have to take
steps to make sure the addresses it keeps on file (and releases to
members of the public on request) are correct. So no "ha ha I'll just
sign up with a fake address".

Hence, please don't talk down the "associate" membership, it is the best
thing we could do for member privacy.

This might of course all change - for the better or for the worse - if
the OSMF should move to another jurisdiction altogether ;)

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"