Cameron Shorter wrote:
Good processes + no money is an acceptable strategy so long as we have
consciously made this decision and everyone is aware of the strategy.
Hello,
keeping budgets low already is a corporate strategy of OSGeo as far as I am concerned. I am eager to extend this strategy to Legal Support. We are not here to fight legal wars but to further Free and Open Source Software. Whenever someone does want to pick on us we should have a solid ground and we have this with the incubation guidelines as they are. All that has to happen then will then happen, not now.
As long as we have more or less empty pockets and do not aim at leveraging money as a major facilitator against anybody and we continue to build our brand as being a straight group of spatial FOSS addicts there is little reason to get at us from the legal side anyway. What would you get? A bad reputation, little or no money at all and a large bunch of really angry people. Hooray, lets go sue some Foundations.
I disagree with Frank and find that Adrian Custer's proposed document for the GeoTools Project is a good starting point. As everything in this world it is not perfect and it will develop in future. Additionally I think we do not even need this document if it gives anybody a headache.
My personal opinion is that a lot of the discussion is beside the point and we are oftentimes confusing copyright, ownership, originator's rights, branding and what really makes up a project - the community around it. We should get a lawyer only when we need one as we cannot anticipate in which context we will need her. Please never ever be IANAL again, I am tired of reading that phrase.
Call me simplistic but I am still of the strong opinion that all we need to do is get some GeoTools developers go through the project files, change the Copyright to point at OSGeo and commit. My only concern was that the developers might feel they lose control and OSGeo could go berserk and sell the code Copyright to some big bad corporation. I think it simply cannot. And even if it did it wouldn't make any difference as anybody can always fork the last GNUed one and go for it. Can we get over it, please and let GeoTools graduate?
Best regards,
Arnulf.
Allan Doyle wrote:
On Oct 30, 2007, at 15:09 , Michael P. Gerlek wrote:
Way back on that cold day in Chicago, I'm not sure anyone ever really
thought about what it would mean when we said we'd "offer legal
protection".
Does it imply/lead-to/entail some sort of indemnification? Ouch, that
would be pricey... How does the Apache gang, et al, handle this?
My recollection is that the Apache gang carefully keeps their coffers
empty and makes sure the code all legally belongs to the Apache
Foundation. Thus there's not enough of a pot of gold to win in a suit.
However, I'm guessing that this strategy depends on a pretty
well-defined process to ensure there are no loopholes.
Allan
-mpg
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Landon Blake
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 7:56 AM
To: OSGeo Discussions
Subject: RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] Board Proposal: Statement of
OSGeo Legal Support
Cameron,
I think this is an excellent idea, and a lawyer should definitely be
consulted. I wonder if the legal staff at the Software Freedom
Conservancy could assist.
Landon
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Cameron Shorter
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 3:56 AM
To: OSGeo-Board
Cc: OSGeo Discussions; Adrian Custer
Subject: [OSGeo-Discuss] Board Proposal: Statement of OSGeo Legal
Support
OSGeo Board, (CC to OSGeo Discuss),
During the founding of OSGeo, it was often noted that OSGeo projects
would benefit from OSGeo legal protection. Now, as Geotools wrestles
with graduation criteria and how to handle license assignment, the
nature and level of legal protection offered by OSGeo is
unclear. Also
unclear is the level of legal review available (as tested by Geotools
crafting of a Copywrite Assignment document).
Consequently, geotools is having difficulty deciding whether
it is wise
to assign copywrite to OSGeo.
I suspect a large part of the problem is that board members (like
myself) are not lawyers and don't have a clear understanding of the
options, the value of each of the options to OSGeo and the
projects (how
much protection is given), and the cost both in time and financially.
Key questions to answer for each option are:
* What level of support is given to contributors and license reviewers
(individuals and companies)
* What level of support is given to OSGeo users?
* What level of support is given to projects? Will OSGeo
fight a license
infringer on behalf of a project?
* What level of support is given to the OSGeo Foundation?
*Proposal*
That the board makes a clear statement on their website about
nature and
level of support offered by OSGeo to OSGeo projects and Individuals.
This statement needs to be backed up with a budget item addressing
financial implications related to the statement.
Implementation:
I suggest the steps to achieve the above would be:
1. Board approves budget to have a lawyer, or volunteer with legal
review, to draw up a list of options and their financial
implications.
Adrian Custer's review provides an excellent basis for a
lawyer to start
from. http://docs.codehaus.org/display/GEOTOOLS/Geotools+Legal+Review
2. Board votes to select best option.
3. OSGeo financial sponsors are given opportunity to contribute to
decision.
4. OSGeo budgets for decision
5. OSGeo records the legal stance publicly (on a webpage).
--
Cameron Shorter
Geospatial Systems Architect
Tel: +61 (0)2 8570 5050
Mob: +61 (0)419 142 254
Think Globally, Fix Locally
Commercial Support for Geospatial Open Source Software
http://www.lisasoft.com/LISAsoft/SupportedProducts.html
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Warning:
Information provided via electronic media is not guaranteed
against defects including translation and transmission
errors. If the reader is not the intended recipient, you are
hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you
have received this information in error, please notify the
sender immediately.
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
