Re: [Wikimedia-l] Question: How do we define lobbying?
There are some useful draft definitions here. It would be handy to get a page on meta started as a list of best practices for chapters and other groups that may not be sure of what are normal sorts of lobbying accepted within the Wikimedia movement that could be okay for funding support. From my personal experience I have done some stuff that might be called lobbying in the last year: * Given evidence to parliament on Wikimedia projects as part of a joint fact finding committee on (failed) super injunctions. * Researched proposed changes in UK copyright legislation (open publishing and recognition of orphan works) and then supported a position paper back to the parliamentary committee inviting feedback. * Taken part in hosting a workshop for academic bodies on open publishing which included how to help Jimmy Wales with approaching the right political stakeholders in government. * Written to government funded bodies and the official holders of Crown Copyright to clarify interpretations claims of copyright over public domain works. None of the above amounted to much in terms of costs to the movement (apart from my unpaid volunteer time), however I think all could be valid for UK Chapter staff support, travel claims or supporting legal advice, were we to have asked for any. Cheers, Fae On 20 April 2013 08:19, Andre Engels wrote: > Lobbying is any activity that has the intention of influencing the opinions > of politicians and other influential people on issues. I think a clear (or > at least, at first look clear) between black (corruption-like) and white > (ethic) lobbying would be that white lobbying consists of bringing > information and opinions to politicians and/or the general public, black > lobbying consists of bringing them advantages or promises. > > In general, lobbying consists of sending letters, petitions and such to > politicians, parliaments, governments and such, and talking with those > about subjects we are interested in. It's comparable to propaganda > (political advertising), but directed at 'those in power' rather than the > population as a whole. > > -- > André Engels, andreeng...@gmail.com > ___ > Wikimedia-l mailing list > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l -- fae...@gmail.com http://j.mp/faewm Guide to email tags: http://j.mp/mfae ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Question: How do we define lobbying?
On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 8:46 AM, Ilario Valdelli wrote: > The problem is that in some European countries lobbying is in a gray zone > at the limit of "corruption" and it's not legally recognized. > > What is important is to define clearly what people means with "lobbying" > and may be better to change the word. > Lobbying is any activity that has the intention of influencing the opinions of politicians and other influential people on issues. I think a clear (or at least, at first look clear) between black (corruption-like) and white (ethic) lobbying would be that white lobbying consists of bringing information and opinions to politicians and/or the general public, black lobbying consists of bringing them advantages or promises. In general, lobbying consists of sending letters, petitions and such to politicians, parliaments, governments and such, and talking with those about subjects we are interested in. It's comparable to propaganda (political advertising), but directed at 'those in power' rather than the population as a whole. -- André Engels, andreeng...@gmail.com ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Question: How do we define lobbying?
In the WMF context, it has a precise (well, reasonably precise) definition under US law. Perhaps we can clarify how this applies / what would qualify in different contexts. SJ On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 8:46 AM, Ilario Valdelli wrote: > The problem is that in some European countries lobbying is in a gray zone > at the limit of "corruption" and it's not legally recognized. > > What is important is to define clearly what people means with "lobbying" > and may be better to change the word. > > > On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 5:37 PM, Fae wrote: > >> In a workshop in the Milan conference, there was a break-out >> discussion led by Iolanda (WMIT) on lobbying. There is a lot of >> interest in finding ways of supporting change in copyright legislation >> and open knowledge access in as many countries as possible. >> >> One of the interesting features of the WMF agreement when providing >> funds under the FDC process is that this money should not be used for >> lobbying. During the coffee break I had a quick chat with Garfield >> (the WMF CFO) about a possible clarification. My understanding from >> that chat was that if there were valid reasons for lobbying in support >> of our cause, this should be a separate grant for traceability >> reasons, it is not intended to imply a blanket ban, but traceability >> is needed to satisfy the IRS. If a chapter has separate income from >> the WMF, then there is no concern as this is a matter for the >> individual chapter board and membership to worry about. >> >> I think this is a useful clarification, and this ought to be followed >> up as an action from our workshop. >> >> I would welcome any comments from the wider community on what sorts of >> lobbying as a movement that we definitely want to support, encourage >> and possibly provide funds for, and if we could come to a clearer >> definition of what lobbying is (such as political protest) and things >> we do as a community that is not quite lobbying, even though it may >> relate to government legislation (such as publishing a white paper >> with our summary of the benefits of changes in copyright law). >> >> Cheers, >> Fae >> -- >> fae...@gmail.com http://j.mp/faewm >> Guide to email tags: http://j.mp/mfae >> >> ___ >> Wikimedia-l mailing list >> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l >> > > > > -- > Ilario Valdelli > Wikimedia CH > Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens > Association pour l’avancement des connaissances libre > Associazione per il sostegno alla conoscenza libera > Switzerland - 8008 Zürich > Tel: +41764821371 > http://www.wikimedia.ch > ___ > Wikimedia-l mailing list > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l -- Samuel Klein @metasj w:user:sj +1 617 529 4266 ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Question: How do we define lobbying?
The problem is that in some European countries lobbying is in a gray zone at the limit of "corruption" and it's not legally recognized. What is important is to define clearly what people means with "lobbying" and may be better to change the word. On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 5:37 PM, Fae wrote: > In a workshop in the Milan conference, there was a break-out > discussion led by Iolanda (WMIT) on lobbying. There is a lot of > interest in finding ways of supporting change in copyright legislation > and open knowledge access in as many countries as possible. > > One of the interesting features of the WMF agreement when providing > funds under the FDC process is that this money should not be used for > lobbying. During the coffee break I had a quick chat with Garfield > (the WMF CFO) about a possible clarification. My understanding from > that chat was that if there were valid reasons for lobbying in support > of our cause, this should be a separate grant for traceability > reasons, it is not intended to imply a blanket ban, but traceability > is needed to satisfy the IRS. If a chapter has separate income from > the WMF, then there is no concern as this is a matter for the > individual chapter board and membership to worry about. > > I think this is a useful clarification, and this ought to be followed > up as an action from our workshop. > > I would welcome any comments from the wider community on what sorts of > lobbying as a movement that we definitely want to support, encourage > and possibly provide funds for, and if we could come to a clearer > definition of what lobbying is (such as political protest) and things > we do as a community that is not quite lobbying, even though it may > relate to government legislation (such as publishing a white paper > with our summary of the benefits of changes in copyright law). > > Cheers, > Fae > -- > fae...@gmail.com http://j.mp/faewm > Guide to email tags: http://j.mp/mfae > > ___ > Wikimedia-l mailing list > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l > -- Ilario Valdelli Wikimedia CH Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens Association pour l’avancement des connaissances libre Associazione per il sostegno alla conoscenza libera Switzerland - 8008 Zürich Tel: +41764821371 http://www.wikimedia.ch ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Question: How do we define lobbying?
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 8:37 AM, Fae wrote: > In a workshop in the Milan conference, there was a break-out > discussion led by Iolanda (WMIT) on lobbying. There is a lot of > interest in finding ways of supporting change in copyright legislation > and open knowledge access in as many countries as possible. > > One of the interesting features of the WMF agreement when providing > funds under the FDC process is that this money should not be used for > lobbying. During the coffee break I had a quick chat with Garfield > (the WMF CFO) about a possible clarification. My understanding from > that chat was that if there were valid reasons for lobbying in support > of our cause, this should be a separate grant for traceability > reasons, it is not intended to imply a blanket ban, but traceability > is needed to satisfy the IRS. If a chapter has separate income from > the WMF, then there is no concern as this is a matter for the > individual chapter board and membership to worry about. > > I think this is a useful clarification, and this ought to be followed > up as an action from our workshop. > > I would welcome any comments from the wider community on what sorts of > lobbying as a movement that we definitely want to support, encourage > and possibly provide funds for, and if we could come to a clearer > definition of what lobbying is (such as political protest) and things > we do as a community that is not quite lobbying, even though it may > relate to government legislation (such as publishing a white paper > with our summary of the benefits of changes in copyright law). > As a former employee of a non-profit/NGO who lobbied at the state level in the U.S., I believe that there should be clear guidance in each country about what constitutes lobbying and how much of it an employee of a non-profit/NGO can do. This may not be the case everywhere, but there were very specific prescriptions on how much time/money a non-profit could spend on lobbying (defined as advocating or opposing legislation at a local, state or national level). It was a very small portion of the work we could do legally before we would lose our non-profit status. -Matthew > > Cheers, > Fae > -- > fae...@gmail.com http://j.mp/faewm > Guide to email tags: http://j.mp/mfae > > ___ > Wikimedia-l mailing list > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l > -- Matthew Roth Global Communications Manager Wikimedia Foundation +1.415.839.6885 ext 6635 www.wikimediafoundation.org *https://donate.wikimedia.org* ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
[Wikimedia-l] Question: How do we define lobbying?
In a workshop in the Milan conference, there was a break-out discussion led by Iolanda (WMIT) on lobbying. There is a lot of interest in finding ways of supporting change in copyright legislation and open knowledge access in as many countries as possible. One of the interesting features of the WMF agreement when providing funds under the FDC process is that this money should not be used for lobbying. During the coffee break I had a quick chat with Garfield (the WMF CFO) about a possible clarification. My understanding from that chat was that if there were valid reasons for lobbying in support of our cause, this should be a separate grant for traceability reasons, it is not intended to imply a blanket ban, but traceability is needed to satisfy the IRS. If a chapter has separate income from the WMF, then there is no concern as this is a matter for the individual chapter board and membership to worry about. I think this is a useful clarification, and this ought to be followed up as an action from our workshop. I would welcome any comments from the wider community on what sorts of lobbying as a movement that we definitely want to support, encourage and possibly provide funds for, and if we could come to a clearer definition of what lobbying is (such as political protest) and things we do as a community that is not quite lobbying, even though it may relate to government legislation (such as publishing a white paper with our summary of the benefits of changes in copyright law). Cheers, Fae -- fae...@gmail.com http://j.mp/faewm Guide to email tags: http://j.mp/mfae ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
