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

[Bert -Araali- Van Opstal]

What is restricted by UK law, is gracefully resolved in the Associate 
membership.
Of course, the OSMF has to comply with the companies act, no doubt about 
it, and it might change as we are looking for alternatives regarding the 
Brexit.

This restricts however full participation and inclusiveness, a core 
value of OSM, just as privacy.
Many countries don't have addresses, neither do some have a "western" 
personal name concept. Revealing your address, exact locations and name 
might also have other motivations like political or gender without 
endangering life and limb.

We have an advisory board, maybe a different or similar construction, 
apart from the strict legal requirements is a possibility. I mean a 
"open and inclusive", an "executive" board which determines the 
policies, strategic plan, operational management etc... as a board 
accessible, open to the full electorate or OSM community. Essentially 
reducing the "legal" board to a purely administrative and ceremonial 
organism. They just sign and confirm all the decisions made by the 
"open" board.

I am not a lawyer, but for sure some other organisations must have faced 
the same concerns and it's worth to look at it in the reviewing AoA 
process and maybe relocation of the OSMF.
Associate membership seems a good compromise, however disregards some 
basic human rights and other laws which should offer protection for 
those affected by personal safety and security. We don't want to be a 
platform for terrorists or criminals, but on the other hand we shouldn't 
impose restrictions or comply with legal structures or laws that are 
against the global OSM communities core values, free, open, respect for 
privacy, inclusive and diverse.

Greetings,

Bert Araali

On 06/08/2021 11:53, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/attachments/20210806/eb37e231/attachment.htm>