Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Pine W]

Hi Seddon,

Thanks for this summary of the issues.

Streamlining and standardizing trademark agreements with affiliates for
branded merch production would be great.

Even supposing that the US affiliates went to the trouble of opening a
collective merch store, the production and shipping costs for small batches
of high quality apparel are so high that I doubt that there would be a good
business case for us to try to turn a store into a source of revenue that
earns much more than it costs to operate. That said, it seems to me that it
should be OK for affiliates like WMFR to run merch stores and generate
income from them that exceeds cost recovery so long as the proceeds are
used by the affiliates in a manner that's compatible with the affiliate and
Wikimedia missions.

Pine

On Mar 23, 2016 17:28, "Joseph Seddon"  wrote:
>
> Hey John et. al
>
> Apologies for the delaying in responding to the last few emails. I want to
> try and cover a couple of the points that been raised.
>
> I'll first start with the history. I am very much aware of the background
> surrounding merchandise, in particular the chapters and the changes in the
> chapter agreements back in 2009 that essentially stopped all that. At the
> time I was on the board of Wikimedia UK and I very much remember the
> frustrations that surrounded the changes. In terms of who has and who
> hasn't run commercial stores I am not going to even attempt to summarise
> that here and I honestly don't think people rehashing the particular
> individual histories of trademark agreements of the last half a decade for
> how ever many affiliates have had them. We all have far more interesting
> and worthwhile things to talk about in the movement.
>
> So here's to looking forward and where we can do things better:
>
> Where no exchange of money is involved, the Trademark policy already does
a
> good job of allowing affiliates or members of the community to print or
> make one-off merchandise to give away at the events they run, or to
members
> of their organisations.
>
> Where we could do probably do better is where the exchange of money is
only
> for the specific purpose of cost recovery. The sort of thing that Pine was
> talking about in relation to Wikiconference USA. Merchandise isn't cheap
> and where possible it makes sense to be able to offset the cost. It's
> probably an area we should strive to make easier, more consistent and less
> of a struggle for affiliates and where we could probably make the biggest
> impact in improving the ability of affiliates to produce small runs of
cool
> stuff.
>
> The operating of stores by affiliates is one that I think there is a lot
of
> potential in. The WMF store, in its very focused scope, works well. But
> there are a lot of areas where we could do better. Multilingual store and
> checkpoint support is lacking, international shipping is expensive,
support
> for local currency should be better and an ability to print on demand is
an
> area that needs work. I think that this could be improved through other
> stores. It just needs to be done right and a good framework set out for
> chapters to do this work. I and others will need to time work out what
that
> will be.
>
> This whole topic was something that was one of the first that was
discussed
> about areas that at as department we could do better in terms of working
> with the community in. There is a lot of good will from those above meand
I
> think over time we will see some good changes here. It's not the only area
> I am working on and we are only 6-7 weeks into me being on board but I
will
> get to it.
>
> I am going to be in Berlin for the Wikimedia Conference and I think it
> would be a good place to start conversations about how we can move forward
> in an area that realistically should not be controversial in any way but
> that should be done well.
>
> Regards
> Seddon
>
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 11:07 PM, John Mark Vandenberg 
> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 12:51 AM, Sam Klein 
> > wrote:
> > >..
> > > On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 12:07 PM, John Mark Vandenberg <
jay...@gmail.com
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >> IIRC, there were several affiliates that were previously running a
> > >> store, and naturally supporting the most relevant languages of their
> > >> community.  They were effectively shutdown, and localisation lost due
> > >> to centralisation to the WMF.
> > >
> > >
> > > Is this true?  Please record any actual examples on:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_trademarks
> >
> > I dont have any actual examples, only possibly faulty memories of
> > events that mostly affected other affiliates.
> >
> > As I recall, and apologies in advance for my memories fading or being
> > faulty, the French, Italian and German chapters were running what
> > could be considered a store before the WMF's "Chapters Agreement"
> > and/or "Fundraising Agreements" of 2009/2010 were 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Joseph Seddon]

Hey John et. al

Apologies for the delaying in responding to the last few emails. I want to
try and cover a couple of the points that been raised.

I'll first start with the history. I am very much aware of the background
surrounding merchandise, in particular the chapters and the changes in the
chapter agreements back in 2009 that essentially stopped all that. At the
time I was on the board of Wikimedia UK and I very much remember the
frustrations that surrounded the changes. In terms of who has and who
hasn't run commercial stores I am not going to even attempt to summarise
that here and I honestly don't think people rehashing the particular
individual histories of trademark agreements of the last half a decade for
how ever many affiliates have had them. We all have far more interesting
and worthwhile things to talk about in the movement.

So here's to looking forward and where we can do things better:

Where no exchange of money is involved, the Trademark policy already does a
good job of allowing affiliates or members of the community to print or
make one-off merchandise to give away at the events they run, or to members
of their organisations.

Where we could do probably do better is where the exchange of money is only
for the specific purpose of cost recovery. The sort of thing that Pine was
talking about in relation to Wikiconference USA. Merchandise isn't cheap
and where possible it makes sense to be able to offset the cost. It's
probably an area we should strive to make easier, more consistent and less
of a struggle for affiliates and where we could probably make the biggest
impact in improving the ability of affiliates to produce small runs of cool
stuff.

The operating of stores by affiliates is one that I think there is a lot of
potential in. The WMF store, in its very focused scope, works well. But
there are a lot of areas where we could do better. Multilingual store and
checkpoint support is lacking, international shipping is expensive, support
for local currency should be better and an ability to print on demand is an
area that needs work. I think that this could be improved through other
stores. It just needs to be done right and a good framework set out for
chapters to do this work. I and others will need to time work out what that
will be.

This whole topic was something that was one of the first that was discussed
about areas that at as department we could do better in terms of working
with the community in. There is a lot of good will from those above meand I
think over time we will see some good changes here. It's not the only area
I am working on and we are only 6-7 weeks into me being on board but I will
get to it.

I am going to be in Berlin for the Wikimedia Conference and I think it
would be a good place to start conversations about how we can move forward
in an area that realistically should not be controversial in any way but
that should be done well.

Regards
Seddon

On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 11:07 PM, John Mark Vandenberg 
wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 12:51 AM, Sam Klein 
> wrote:
> >..
> > On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 12:07 PM, John Mark Vandenberg  >
> > wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> IIRC, there were several affiliates that were previously running a
> >> store, and naturally supporting the most relevant languages of their
> >> community.  They were effectively shutdown, and localisation lost due
> >> to centralisation to the WMF.
> >
> >
> > Is this true?  Please record any actual examples on:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_trademarks
>
> I dont have any actual examples, only possibly faulty memories of
> events that mostly affected other affiliates.
>
> As I recall, and apologies in advance for my memories fading or being
> faulty, the French, Italian and German chapters were running what
> could be considered a store before the WMF's "Chapters Agreement"
> and/or "Fundraising Agreements" of 2009/2010 were required to be
> signed by chapters , and the language of those agreements removed the
> possibility of merchandise.
>
> Again as I recall, many chapters tried to negotiate amendments to that
> prohibition, and I vaguely recall the French chapter being successful,
> and I vaguely recall the Italian chapter being unsuccessful.
>
> I see the French chapter's shop is still open.
>
> http://wikimediashop.spreadshirt.net/
>
> I do not see a shop for Italia or Deutschland, but locals may be able
> to find what I can not.
>
> Any details regarding the old chapters stores, especially German and
> Italian, would be most welcomed to augment and possibly correct my
> vague recollections.
>
> Sj, 99% of this happened during your time on the board, so it would be
> great if you can help provide some clarity with whatever memories you
> have.
>
> --
> John Vandenberg
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Pine W]

Thanks SJ. I largely agree with you there.

There is a complicated backstory about the hats, but I think it's safe to
say that we in Cascadia aren't especially interested in running our own
merch store. However, given the years of delays of getting the hats into
the WMF store, it would be nice if we could get a license to make
occasional production runs of hats and other merchandise and resell the
merchandise at cost, particularly if WikiConference USA happens in Seattle
later this year.

In general, WMF Trademarks is highly protective of the WMF marks. Some of
that is understandable, but it adds a lot of red tape and delays that I
believe sometimes delay or obstruct progress toward goals that are more
important than zealous and highly detailed trademark protections.

Pine

On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 5:23 PM, Sam Klein  wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 7:07 PM, John Mark Vandenberg 
> wrote:
> >
> > Again as I recall, many chapters tried to negotiate amendments to that
> > prohibition, and I vaguely recall the French chapter being successful,
> > and I vaguely recall the Italian chapter being unsuccessful.
> >
> > I see the French chapter's shop is still open.
> >
> > http://wikimediashop.spreadshirt.net/
> >
> > I do not see a shop for Italia or Deutschland, but locals may be able
> > to find what I can not.
> >
> > Any details regarding the old chapters stores, especially German and
> > Italian, would be most welcomed to augment and possibly correct my
> > vague recollections.
> >
> > Sj, 99% of this happened during your time on the board, so it would be
> > great if you can help provide some clarity with whatever memories you
> > have.
>
>
> TLDR: If a local group comes up with a swag item and design, it should be
> possible to get that into the hands of supporters and community members in
> short order.  What group produces the item, from where it is shipped in
> what batch quantities, and who pays for the item, depend a bit on context.
>
>
> I discussed this with lawyers on staff a number of times while on the
> board.  My understanding  [lawyers, please weigh in to correct me as
> needed] was that a separate agreement was necessary, but did not need to be
> onerous, and could be worked out for stores run by established
> organizations (such as french and german stores).
>
> It is possible to be extra cautious to the extent of not allowing any swag
> to use trademarks unless the central licensor has direct control over the
> quality of the produced product, though some argue that this is not
> necessary.[1]  This extra caution could be a reason not to allow one-off
> initiatives such as a run of hats carried out by a user group.  But
> established chapters & thematic orgs with offices & administrative staff
> should be able to run their own regional store (providing in-country
> shipping, a website in the national languages, ) which could handle any
> one-offs requested by user groups or projects in the area.
>
>
> Finally, for cases where the WMF is feeling trademark-conservative (smaller
> stores, or any swag with a possibility of recipients feeling that there was
> some trademark confusion), it has two further options: a] it can cover the
> full cost of local swag (if you give things away rather than selling them,
> you don't trigger the risk mentioned above, or iirc the related clause in
> the affiliate agreements)... and b] it can arrange to make the swag in the
> global store, and cover the difference in int'l shipping costs (or ship the
> results in bulk to the regional affiliate for further distribution).
>
>
> Actual data on which groups want stores and swag, and what they are looking
> for, has been scant.  I recommend organizing such plans and designs on
> meta, and noting any open tm-related discussion threads there.
>
> If it turns out that inspiring designs, requested by community groups, are
> unable to be produced because the global store cannot produce them, local
> groups cannot get a grant to cover their production, and local groups
> cannot get a simple TM agreement to let them recoup their costs from the
> recipients, then something need to be fixed.  A fix, once there is a
> specific problem in hand, should not be difficult.
>
> Warmly,
> SJ
>
> [1] For a brief & incomplete review of relevant issues, see:
>
> http://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1027=aulr
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Sam Klein]

On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 7:07 PM, John Mark Vandenberg 
wrote:
>
> Again as I recall, many chapters tried to negotiate amendments to that
> prohibition, and I vaguely recall the French chapter being successful,
> and I vaguely recall the Italian chapter being unsuccessful.
>
> I see the French chapter's shop is still open.
>
> http://wikimediashop.spreadshirt.net/
>
> I do not see a shop for Italia or Deutschland, but locals may be able
> to find what I can not.
>
> Any details regarding the old chapters stores, especially German and
> Italian, would be most welcomed to augment and possibly correct my
> vague recollections.
>
> Sj, 99% of this happened during your time on the board, so it would be
> great if you can help provide some clarity with whatever memories you
> have.


TLDR: If a local group comes up with a swag item and design, it should be
possible to get that into the hands of supporters and community members in
short order.  What group produces the item, from where it is shipped in
what batch quantities, and who pays for the item, depend a bit on context.


I discussed this with lawyers on staff a number of times while on the
board.  My understanding  [lawyers, please weigh in to correct me as
needed] was that a separate agreement was necessary, but did not need to be
onerous, and could be worked out for stores run by established
organizations (such as french and german stores).

It is possible to be extra cautious to the extent of not allowing any swag
to use trademarks unless the central licensor has direct control over the
quality of the produced product, though some argue that this is not
necessary.[1]  This extra caution could be a reason not to allow one-off
initiatives such as a run of hats carried out by a user group.  But
established chapters & thematic orgs with offices & administrative staff
should be able to run their own regional store (providing in-country
shipping, a website in the national languages, ) which could handle any
one-offs requested by user groups or projects in the area.


Finally, for cases where the WMF is feeling trademark-conservative (smaller
stores, or any swag with a possibility of recipients feeling that there was
some trademark confusion), it has two further options: a] it can cover the
full cost of local swag (if you give things away rather than selling them,
you don't trigger the risk mentioned above, or iirc the related clause in
the affiliate agreements)... and b] it can arrange to make the swag in the
global store, and cover the difference in int'l shipping costs (or ship the
results in bulk to the regional affiliate for further distribution).


Actual data on which groups want stores and swag, and what they are looking
for, has been scant.  I recommend organizing such plans and designs on
meta, and noting any open tm-related discussion threads there.

If it turns out that inspiring designs, requested by community groups, are
unable to be produced because the global store cannot produce them, local
groups cannot get a grant to cover their production, and local groups
cannot get a simple TM agreement to let them recoup their costs from the
recipients, then something need to be fixed.  A fix, once there is a
specific problem in hand, should not be difficult.

Warmly,
SJ

[1] For a brief & incomplete review of relevant issues, see:
http://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1027=aulr
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Pine W]

Fascinating. My discussions with WMF Trademarks and WMF Fundraising lead me
to think that they didn't know of the existence of these historical
arrangements, because if they had I would think that they would have
swiftly approved the license request for logo use on hats, modeled after
the agreement with WMFR.

My experience with WMF Trademarks in general has been mixed. Sometimes
they're great and resolutions are swift, and sometimes there's clunkiness
and dropped balls. The situation with logo licenses for apparel is one of
the latter.

Pine
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[John Mark Vandenberg]

On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 12:51 AM, Sam Klein  wrote:
>..
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 12:07 PM, John Mark Vandenberg 
> wrote:
>
>>
>> IIRC, there were several affiliates that were previously running a
>> store, and naturally supporting the most relevant languages of their
>> community.  They were effectively shutdown, and localisation lost due
>> to centralisation to the WMF.
>
>
> Is this true?  Please record any actual examples on:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_trademarks

I dont have any actual examples, only possibly faulty memories of
events that mostly affected other affiliates.

As I recall, and apologies in advance for my memories fading or being
faulty, the French, Italian and German chapters were running what
could be considered a store before the WMF's "Chapters Agreement"
and/or "Fundraising Agreements" of 2009/2010 were required to be
signed by chapters , and the language of those agreements removed the
possibility of merchandise.

Again as I recall, many chapters tried to negotiate amendments to that
prohibition, and I vaguely recall the French chapter being successful,
and I vaguely recall the Italian chapter being unsuccessful.

I see the French chapter's shop is still open.

http://wikimediashop.spreadshirt.net/

I do not see a shop for Italia or Deutschland, but locals may be able
to find what I can not.

Any details regarding the old chapters stores, especially German and
Italian, would be most welcomed to augment and possibly correct my
vague recollections.

Sj, 99% of this happened during your time on the board, so it would be
great if you can help provide some clarity with whatever memories you
have.

--
John Vandenberg

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Joseph Seddon]

Hi Fae,

Apologies for the length. I'll take your question into two parts:

Firstly about how we use the funds. We are extremely explicit about how the
proceeds are used:

On the front of the store:

*"We use the proceeds from the store to send thank you gifts to the
volunteers who make Wikipedia possible."*


In the shop FAQ:


*Who profits from this shop?**100% of the proceeds from the Wikipedia store
go to the Wikimedia Foundation, the non-profit organization that operates
Wikipedia and other free knowledge projects. The profits are earmarked
toward our Merchandise Giveaways Program to reward those who have made an
impact on the projects.*


And on the FAQ on meta a slight variant of the above:

*Who profits from this shop?*
*100% of the profits from the Wikimedia Shop go to the Wikimedia
Foundation. It is not the intended purpose of the Wikimedia Shop to become
a Profit center. All proceeds are filtered back into the shop to keep
production costs low, subsidize shipping and help to provide merchandise
specifically aimed towards community members.*


On the point specifically about what the profit margin of the store is and
the percentage of any one purchase going towards the above. At no point do
we claim that any purchase is a "donation" and we do state the following:


*Are purchases tax deductible?*
All of the purchase price of the item goes directly to funding the cost of
the merchandise and the shop overhead, therefore we're not able to provide
a tax receipt for any of the purchase. You can make a donation to the
Wikimedia Foundation, which may be tax deductible in the country where you
donate from, by visiting donate.wikimedia.org.


What is not currently made explicitly clear on any of those pages is what
percentage of a merchandise bought goes towards community merchandise so we
could do a little better in that respect, and it is something I will follow
up on. It's important to keep in mind that it's not quite as simple as if
you purchase X then Y goes to community merchandise since we also subsidise
shipping which is also covered in the FAQ page which states the following:



*Why does shipping cost so much?*Shipping products internationally is
always going to cost more than a domestic shipment. We've created the
'Wikimedia flat-rate global' shipping option, which is $15 USD, to provide
a cost-effective way to send a shipment anywhere in the world. In some
cases your shipment costs could be well under $15 USD, but when it isn't,
and when your order is under 5lbs (about 2.2Kg), we provide a subsidized
flat rate so customers in all parts of the world can purchase products at a
reasonable rate.

I hope that covers the majority of what you asked.

Seddon
On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 2:53 PM, Fæ  wrote:

> Tim, thanks for raising the Trademark Policy.
>
> Joseph, can you point me to where https://store.wikimedia.org explains
> exactly how much of the "donation" is profit going to WMF funds and
> how much is administration and costs (both supplier and WMF costs of
> administration)?
>
> My assumption is that "You truthfully advertise to customers how much
> of the selling price, if any, will be donated to Wikimedia sites" is
> an ethical standard that applies to the Wikimedia Store and Fund
> raising department as much as it is it legally required by the WMF for
> Chapters or other organizations that sell or create products with the
> trademark.
>
> Thanks,
> Fae
>
> On 22 March 2016 at 13:38, Tim Landscheidt  wrote:
> > Fæ  wrote:
> >
>  (I must admit that i tested the job a year ago, the product was fine,
> the shipment fast. A bit expensive for my taste.)
> >
> >>> Expensive? The profit adds funds the WMF, surely.
> >
> >> This is a logical fallacy that many charities fall into, and end up
> >> damaging their reputation in the tabloid press when it turns out that
> >> 80%+ of donations "disappear" in costs such as commercial fees, paying
> >> chugger agencies and bonuses and six-figure salaries for
> fundraising/marketing
> >> directors, rather than going to the intended beneficiary.
> >
> >> Here's a highly likely pragmatic scenario... if, say, a $20 "donation"
> >> to get a WMF merchandise tee-shirt disappeared as:
> >> * $ 12.00 basic transaction and product costs
> >> * $ 6.00 profit/fees to intermediary organizations
> >> * $ 1.80 WMF administration costs
> >> * 20 cents is the outcome "donation" to WMF causes (1%)
> >
> >> Then yes, the transaction adds funds to the WMF, but in a really
> >> crappy way where the system probably cost several times more in WMF
> >> staff time to set up than it will make over many years, comparatively
> >> huge profit margins are going to unnamed parties (at least unnamed for
> >> the purchaser or WMF volunteers), and in a non-transparent way too.
> >
> > Your point is made much more succinct in the Trademark Pol-
> > icy
> > (cf.
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Pine W]

The current practice, in my experience, is maximum red tape.

Pine
On Mar 22, 2016 10:52, "Sam Klein"  wrote:

> Having a shop that is run with low overhead by someone who specializes in
> handling inventory and shipping, is a very good idea.  I've had to do this
> both in-house and externally at a few organizations and when your shipping
> volume is as low as the WM Shop's currently is, it doesn't make sense to do
> it yourself.  Economies of scale are tremendous until you reach the stage
> of having a large storage unit and are shipping thousands of items a day.
>
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 12:07 PM, John Mark Vandenberg 
> wrote:
>
> >
> > IIRC, there were several affiliates that were previously running a
> > store, and naturally supporting the most relevant languages of their
> > community.  They were effectively shutdown, and localisation lost due
> > to centralisation to the WMF.
>
>
> Is this true?  Please record any actual examples on:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_trademarks
>
>
> > The trademark policy provides a sound basis for this type of use of the
> > trademarks, and could allow
> > affiliates to re-open their own shops.
> >
>
> Yes.  As far as I know, any affiliate that wants to run its own shop (for
> instance, including localized swag if they know inexpensive local
> manufacturers & want to set up in-country shipping to avoid international
> shipping fees) should be able to do so with minimal red tape.
>
> SJ
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Sam Klein]

Having a shop that is run with low overhead by someone who specializes in
handling inventory and shipping, is a very good idea.  I've had to do this
both in-house and externally at a few organizations and when your shipping
volume is as low as the WM Shop's currently is, it doesn't make sense to do
it yourself.  Economies of scale are tremendous until you reach the stage
of having a large storage unit and are shipping thousands of items a day.

On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 12:07 PM, John Mark Vandenberg 
wrote:

>
> IIRC, there were several affiliates that were previously running a
> store, and naturally supporting the most relevant languages of their
> community.  They were effectively shutdown, and localisation lost due
> to centralisation to the WMF.


Is this true?  Please record any actual examples on:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_trademarks


> The trademark policy provides a sound basis for this type of use of the
> trademarks, and could allow
> affiliates to re-open their own shops.
>

Yes.  As far as I know, any affiliate that wants to run its own shop (for
instance, including localized swag if they know inexpensive local
manufacturers & want to set up in-country shipping to avoid international
shipping fees) should be able to do so with minimal red tape.

SJ
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Pine W]

I am having a very stretched out discussion, over the course literally of
multiple years, to try to get approval from WMF to produce or aquire
Wikipedia-branded hats. So far no trademark license has been granted. I
have heard multiple times that the WMF store may get these hats, but after
multiple requests over the course of years, this has yet to happen and I at
this rate it will never happen. Given the lack of progress in the WMF
store, I would appreciate it if WMF would grant a trademark license for
Wikipedia-branded apparel for independent production to affiliates who
request it. The lack of progress so far is quite frustrating.

Pine
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[John Mark Vandenberg]

On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 10:01 PM, Nathan  wrote:
> FWIW, it's clear that the trademark policy is intended to apply to users
> other than the WMF. This is all a bit overblown, considering the tiny scale
> of use and money involved.

IIRC, there were several affiliates that were previously running a
store, and naturally supporting the most relevant languages of their
community.  They were effectively shutdown, and localisation lost due
to centralisation to the WMF.  The trademark policy provides a sound
basis for this type of use of the trademarks, and could allow
affiliates to re-open their own shops.

I'd like to know if anyone has received a trademark license under that
"Commercial merchandise" provision of the trademark policy.

It would also be interesting to hear from anyone whose application for
Commercial merchandise was rejected.

-- 
John Vandenberg

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Nathan]

FWIW, it's clear that the trademark policy is intended to apply to users
other than the WMF. This is all a bit overblown, considering the tiny scale
of use and money involved.

On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 10:53 AM, Fæ  wrote:

> Tim, thanks for raising the Trademark Policy.
>
> Joseph, can you point me to where https://store.wikimedia.org explains
> exactly how much of the "donation" is profit going to WMF funds and
> how much is administration and costs (both supplier and WMF costs of
> administration)?
>
> My assumption is that "You truthfully advertise to customers how much
> of the selling price, if any, will be donated to Wikimedia sites" is
> an ethical standard that applies to the Wikimedia Store and Fund
> raising department as much as it is it legally required by the WMF for
> Chapters or other organizations that sell or create products with the
> trademark.
>
> Thanks,
> Fae
>
> On 22 March 2016 at 13:38, Tim Landscheidt  wrote:
> > Fæ  wrote:
> >
>  (I must admit that i tested the job a year ago, the product was fine,
> the shipment fast. A bit expensive for my taste.)
> >
> >>> Expensive? The profit adds funds the WMF, surely.
> >
> >> This is a logical fallacy that many charities fall into, and end up
> >> damaging their reputation in the tabloid press when it turns out that
> >> 80%+ of donations "disappear" in costs such as commercial fees, paying
> >> chugger agencies and bonuses and six-figure salaries for
> fundraising/marketing
> >> directors, rather than going to the intended beneficiary.
> >
> >> Here's a highly likely pragmatic scenario... if, say, a $20 "donation"
> >> to get a WMF merchandise tee-shirt disappeared as:
> >> * $ 12.00 basic transaction and product costs
> >> * $ 6.00 profit/fees to intermediary organizations
> >> * $ 1.80 WMF administration costs
> >> * 20 cents is the outcome "donation" to WMF causes (1%)
> >
> >> Then yes, the transaction adds funds to the WMF, but in a really
> >> crappy way where the system probably cost several times more in WMF
> >> staff time to set up than it will make over many years, comparatively
> >> huge profit margins are going to unnamed parties (at least unnamed for
> >> the purchaser or WMF volunteers), and in a non-transparent way too.
> >
> > Your point is made much more succinct in the Trademark Pol-
> > icy
> > (cf.
> https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Trademark_policy#policy-commercialmerch
> ):
> >
> > | You may make merchandise with the Wikimedia trademarks for
> > | commercial use, if:
> >
> > | - You obtain a trademark license from the Wikimedia Founda-
> > |   tion;
> > | - You follow our Visual Identity Guidelines; and
> > | - You truthfully advertise to customers how much of the
> > |   selling price, if any, will be donated to Wikimedia sites.
> >
> > The problem is the belief that a charity with a focus on
> > distributing knowledge must have its own t-shirt shop,
> > probably fostered by firm disciples getting free mugs.
> >
> > Tim
> --
> fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Fæ]

Tim, thanks for raising the Trademark Policy.

Joseph, can you point me to where https://store.wikimedia.org explains
exactly how much of the "donation" is profit going to WMF funds and
how much is administration and costs (both supplier and WMF costs of
administration)?

My assumption is that "You truthfully advertise to customers how much
of the selling price, if any, will be donated to Wikimedia sites" is
an ethical standard that applies to the Wikimedia Store and Fund
raising department as much as it is it legally required by the WMF for
Chapters or other organizations that sell or create products with the
trademark.

Thanks,
Fae

On 22 March 2016 at 13:38, Tim Landscheidt  wrote:
> Fæ  wrote:
>
 (I must admit that i tested the job a year ago, the product was fine, the 
 shipment fast. A bit expensive for my taste.)
>
>>> Expensive? The profit adds funds the WMF, surely.
>
>> This is a logical fallacy that many charities fall into, and end up
>> damaging their reputation in the tabloid press when it turns out that
>> 80%+ of donations "disappear" in costs such as commercial fees, paying
>> chugger agencies and bonuses and six-figure salaries for 
>> fundraising/marketing
>> directors, rather than going to the intended beneficiary.
>
>> Here's a highly likely pragmatic scenario... if, say, a $20 "donation"
>> to get a WMF merchandise tee-shirt disappeared as:
>> * $ 12.00 basic transaction and product costs
>> * $ 6.00 profit/fees to intermediary organizations
>> * $ 1.80 WMF administration costs
>> * 20 cents is the outcome "donation" to WMF causes (1%)
>
>> Then yes, the transaction adds funds to the WMF, but in a really
>> crappy way where the system probably cost several times more in WMF
>> staff time to set up than it will make over many years, comparatively
>> huge profit margins are going to unnamed parties (at least unnamed for
>> the purchaser or WMF volunteers), and in a non-transparent way too.
>
> Your point is made much more succinct in the Trademark Pol-
> icy
> (cf. 
> https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Trademark_policy#policy-commercialmerch):
>
> | You may make merchandise with the Wikimedia trademarks for
> | commercial use, if:
>
> | - You obtain a trademark license from the Wikimedia Founda-
> |   tion;
> | - You follow our Visual Identity Guidelines; and
> | - You truthfully advertise to customers how much of the
> |   selling price, if any, will be donated to Wikimedia sites.
>
> The problem is the belief that a charity with a focus on
> distributing knowledge must have its own t-shirt shop,
> probably fostered by firm disciples getting free mugs.
>
> Tim
-- 
fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
With the same pragmatism a different scenario. If say a $20,- donation
arrives and a T-shirt is send,
* $12 basic transaction and product costs
* $12 pro rata costs of having our "own" product to sell produce
* 1,80 WMF administration costs
* $5,80 loss on every T-shirt
Thanks,
  GerardM

On 22 March 2016 at 13:40, Fæ  wrote:

> On 22 March 2016 at 11:51, Gordon Joly  wrote:
> > On 21/03/16 19:39, Steinsplitter Wiki wrote:
> >> (I must admit that i tested the job a year ago, the product was fine,
> the shipment fast. A bit expensive for my taste.)
> >
> >
> > Expensive? The profit adds funds the WMF, surely.
>
> This is a logical fallacy that many charities fall into, and end up
> damaging their reputation in the tabloid press when it turns out that
> 80%+ of donations "disappear" in costs such as commercial fees, paying
> chugger agencies and bonuses and six-figure salaries for
> fundraising/marketing
> directors, rather than going to the intended beneficiary.
>
> Here's a highly likely pragmatic scenario... if, say, a $20 "donation"
> to get a WMF merchandise tee-shirt disappeared as:
> * $ 12.00 basic transaction and product costs
> * $ 6.00 profit/fees to intermediary organizations
> * $ 1.80 WMF administration costs
> * 20 cents is the outcome "donation" to WMF causes (1%)
>
> Then yes, the transaction adds funds to the WMF, but in a really
> crappy way where the system probably cost several times more in WMF
> staff time to set up than it will make over many years, comparatively
> huge profit margins are going to unnamed parties (at least unnamed for
> the purchaser or WMF volunteers), and in a non-transparent way too.
>
> Fae
> --
> fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Tim Landscheidt]

Fæ  wrote:

>>> (I must admit that i tested the job a year ago, the product was fine, the 
>>> shipment fast. A bit expensive for my taste.)

>> Expensive? The profit adds funds the WMF, surely.

> This is a logical fallacy that many charities fall into, and end up
> damaging their reputation in the tabloid press when it turns out that
> 80%+ of donations "disappear" in costs such as commercial fees, paying
> chugger agencies and bonuses and six-figure salaries for fundraising/marketing
> directors, rather than going to the intended beneficiary.

> Here's a highly likely pragmatic scenario... if, say, a $20 "donation"
> to get a WMF merchandise tee-shirt disappeared as:
> * $ 12.00 basic transaction and product costs
> * $ 6.00 profit/fees to intermediary organizations
> * $ 1.80 WMF administration costs
> * 20 cents is the outcome "donation" to WMF causes (1%)

> Then yes, the transaction adds funds to the WMF, but in a really
> crappy way where the system probably cost several times more in WMF
> staff time to set up than it will make over many years, comparatively
> huge profit margins are going to unnamed parties (at least unnamed for
> the purchaser or WMF volunteers), and in a non-transparent way too.

Your point is made much more succinct in the Trademark Pol-
icy
(cf. 
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Trademark_policy#policy-commercialmerch):

| You may make merchandise with the Wikimedia trademarks for
| commercial use, if:

| - You obtain a trademark license from the Wikimedia Founda-
|   tion;
| - You follow our Visual Identity Guidelines; and
| - You truthfully advertise to customers how much of the
|   selling price, if any, will be donated to Wikimedia sites.

The problem is the belief that a charity with a focus on
distributing knowledge must have its own t-shirt shop,
probably fostered by firm disciples getting free mugs.

Tim


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Fæ]

On 22 March 2016 at 11:51, Gordon Joly  wrote:
> On 21/03/16 19:39, Steinsplitter Wiki wrote:
>> (I must admit that i tested the job a year ago, the product was fine, the 
>> shipment fast. A bit expensive for my taste.)
>
>
> Expensive? The profit adds funds the WMF, surely.

This is a logical fallacy that many charities fall into, and end up
damaging their reputation in the tabloid press when it turns out that
80%+ of donations "disappear" in costs such as commercial fees, paying
chugger agencies and bonuses and six-figure salaries for fundraising/marketing
directors, rather than going to the intended beneficiary.

Here's a highly likely pragmatic scenario... if, say, a $20 "donation"
to get a WMF merchandise tee-shirt disappeared as:
* $ 12.00 basic transaction and product costs
* $ 6.00 profit/fees to intermediary organizations
* $ 1.80 WMF administration costs
* 20 cents is the outcome "donation" to WMF causes (1%)

Then yes, the transaction adds funds to the WMF, but in a really
crappy way where the system probably cost several times more in WMF
staff time to set up than it will make over many years, comparatively
huge profit margins are going to unnamed parties (at least unnamed for
the purchaser or WMF volunteers), and in a non-transparent way too.

Fae
-- 
fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Gordon Joly]

On 21/03/16 19:39, Steinsplitter Wiki wrote:
> (I must admit that i tested the job a year ago, the product was fine, the 
> shipment fast. A bit expensive for my taste.)


Expensive? The profit adds funds the WMF, surely.

Gordo


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[James Alexander]

On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 6:57 PM, K. Peachey  wrote:

> On 21 March 2016 at 22:47, Marc A. Pelletier  wrote:
> >
> > The extra control is hypothetically nice, but in practice one-off
> services
> > that are different from the rest of the infrastructure (as a shop would
> be,
> > like the blog, OTRS, etc) tend to be *extremely* expensive and difficult
> to
> > care for, and tend to be the very weakest points of the system (including
> > privacy and security).
> >
> > Those are only limited by the choice of the foundation.
>
> If they wanted someone with OTRS/wordpress/cisco ios/SmartTeam/etc skills,
> they would hire appropriately so the operations team was equipped with the
> staff and skills needed.
>
> It's like running a shop without a retail manager, It could work, but would
> work a lot better if it was staffed with people with the appropriate
> skillsets.


Totally but it's all a balancing act even if you assume we have the
resources. To do this correctly you'd need at least one person on the tech
side who understand the platform and payments, preferably a couple who
could back them up if need be and who can support different parts/make sure
they're secure/code reviewed/updated etc + the folks on the front end (the
'shop  manager(s)' organizing the actual design/fulfillment/etc). The more
you add the more you need to be making to justify it and as someone who did
this math a fair bit when I was first setting up the shop we'd need quite a
bit more in terms of orders before we were making enough to cover something
in house and that was being relatively conservative in costing assuming we
would only have to pay for 30-40% of some people etc.

It also gets to the "trade off" question. That is obviously a discussion
that is more open and so I won't pretend to have the right answer but I
think at our current budget basically every new hire/project basically has
to have a trade off the hire that won't be backfilled or the project that
is canceled etc. I imagine we all can think of projects that we think are
more or less important but we don't necessarily think of the 'same'
projects which makes that trade off discussion difficult (but important
since we can't just continue to expand the budget forever).

James Alexander
Manager
Trust & Safety
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[K. Peachey]

On 21 March 2016 at 22:47, Marc A. Pelletier  wrote:
>
> The extra control is hypothetically nice, but in practice one-off services
> that are different from the rest of the infrastructure (as a shop would be,
> like the blog, OTRS, etc) tend to be *extremely* expensive and difficult to
> care for, and tend to be the very weakest points of the system (including
> privacy and security).
>
> Those are only limited by the choice of the foundation.

If they wanted someone with OTRS/wordpress/cisco ios/SmartTeam/etc skills,
they would hire appropriately so the operations team was equipped with the
staff and skills needed.

It's like running a shop without a retail manager, It could work, but would
work a lot better if it was staffed with people with the appropriate
skillsets.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Lisa Gruwell]

Adding my thoughts to build upon what Seddon has already said:

The store is not the most mission critical work that we do, but it is
working well. It is good to have people wearing Wikipedia t-shirts out
there and to meet the need of the people who want to purchase Wikimedia
merch.   It is also a very nice thing to be able to thank an editor
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Merchandise_giveaways> with a Wikipedia
coffee mug from time to time. The store is a lean operation and is self
sufficient.  And the profits from the store fund the give away program, so
the more we sell the more we give away.

The team who works on this has done a very good job of keeping the costs
low, producing products people want, and executing the operational side
(they get people the products they ordered on time).  We don't have large
quantities of merch ringing up high warehouse costs.  The merch is stored
in Springfield, Missouri (not San Francisco) where the rent is low.
Between sales and the giveaway program, the inventory moves pretty quickly.

If we had to build out our own sales platform in order to do this, it
probably would not be worth it.  As it is, the shop is meeting a expressed
need, turning a profit, and allowing us to give merch away.  I think the
team has done a very good job with the shop this year.

On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 2:01 PM, Vi to <vituzzu.w...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Above all hosting a shop means:
> *production on demand: no "risks" but products become more expensive and
> slow to deliver
> *warehousing: means immobilizing a certain amount of money at the risk to
> accumulate unsold items.
> IMHO an internal shop would be justified by turnover at least 10 times
> greater than Joseph's estimate in following email.
>
> Vito
>
> 2016-03-21 20:43 GMT+01:00 Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijs...@gmail.com>:
>
> > Hoi,
> > Have you considered the cost? It is not free to run a shop. When another
> > organisation can do it for you for less, it would be not good to have an
> > own shop on principles only.
> > Thanks,
> >   GerardM
> >
> > On 21 March 2016 at 20:39, Steinsplitter Wiki <
> steinsplitter-w...@live.com
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Why do we need such a Shop?
> > >
> > > (I must admit that i tested the job a year ago, the product was fine,
> the
> > > shipment fast. A bit expensive for my taste.)
> > >
> > > I agree with other users that the shop schould be hosted on wikimedia
> > > servers.
> > >
> > > --Steinsplitter
> > >
> > > > Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2016 17:41:46 +0100
> > > > From: rupert.thur...@gmail.com
> > > > To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?
> > > >
> > > > How many orders are handled by this shop?
> > > >
> > > > Rupert
> > > > On Mar 21, 2016 17:32, "Joseph Seddon" <jsed...@wikimedia.org>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > In an ideal world then I would definitely be pushing for a fully
> > > wikimedia
> > > > > hosted online shop. I completely agree with the principles you've
> > > raised.
> > > > > But moving in-house would require resources for building and
> > > maintaining an
> > > > > ecommerce workflow that I don't think we collectively can justify.
> > The
> > > > > setup and maintenance of any solution would require a degree of
> > people
> > > > > power that I personally think could be spent better elsewhere in
> the
> > > > > movement as I am sure you would agree.
> > > > >
> > > > > Throwing together an e-commerce site can be easy. But doing it
> well,
> > > > > ensuring you are PCI compliant, ensuring its stable, secure etc.
> etc.
> > > and
> > > > > making it user friendly both front and back end. That takes time
> and
> > > money.
> > > > > Even if we did all that we would still in end up using a third
> party
> > > > > payment gateway. To ensure the shop is viable and not a drain we
> need
> > > to
> > > > > keep it as efficient as possible.
> > > > >
> > > > > As Marc said Shopify may not be completely FLOSS but many of the
> > > frameworks
> > > > > that Shopify use in their hosted service are on available on Github
> > > [1] and
> > > > > I would encourage you to take a look.
> > > > >
> > > > > With regards to the U

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Vi to]

Above all hosting a shop means:
*production on demand: no "risks" but products become more expensive and
slow to deliver
*warehousing: means immobilizing a certain amount of money at the risk to
accumulate unsold items.
IMHO an internal shop would be justified by turnover at least 10 times
greater than Joseph's estimate in following email.

Vito

2016-03-21 20:43 GMT+01:00 Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijs...@gmail.com>:

> Hoi,
> Have you considered the cost? It is not free to run a shop. When another
> organisation can do it for you for less, it would be not good to have an
> own shop on principles only.
> Thanks,
>   GerardM
>
> On 21 March 2016 at 20:39, Steinsplitter Wiki <steinsplitter-w...@live.com
> >
> wrote:
>
> > Why do we need such a Shop?
> >
> > (I must admit that i tested the job a year ago, the product was fine, the
> > shipment fast. A bit expensive for my taste.)
> >
> > I agree with other users that the shop schould be hosted on wikimedia
> > servers.
> >
> > --Steinsplitter
> >
> > > Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2016 17:41:46 +0100
> > > From: rupert.thur...@gmail.com
> > > To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?
> > >
> > > How many orders are handled by this shop?
> > >
> > > Rupert
> > > On Mar 21, 2016 17:32, "Joseph Seddon" <jsed...@wikimedia.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > In an ideal world then I would definitely be pushing for a fully
> > wikimedia
> > > > hosted online shop. I completely agree with the principles you've
> > raised.
> > > > But moving in-house would require resources for building and
> > maintaining an
> > > > ecommerce workflow that I don't think we collectively can justify.
> The
> > > > setup and maintenance of any solution would require a degree of
> people
> > > > power that I personally think could be spent better elsewhere in the
> > > > movement as I am sure you would agree.
> > > >
> > > > Throwing together an e-commerce site can be easy. But doing it well,
> > > > ensuring you are PCI compliant, ensuring its stable, secure etc. etc.
> > and
> > > > making it user friendly both front and back end. That takes time and
> > money.
> > > > Even if we did all that we would still in end up using a third party
> > > > payment gateway. To ensure the shop is viable and not a drain we need
> > to
> > > > keep it as efficient as possible.
> > > >
> > > > As Marc said Shopify may not be completely FLOSS but many of the
> > frameworks
> > > > that Shopify use in their hosted service are on available on Github
> > [1] and
> > > > I would encourage you to take a look.
> > > >
> > > > With regards to the URL, I as a customer would find a top 10 website
> > > > sending me to a third party URL for their shop highly suspicious and
> I
> > > > certainly could treat it with suspicion. Making it clear that it is
> > hosted
> > > > by shopify I think would at least improve the situation.
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > >
> > > > Seddon
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 7:34 PM, Ricordisamoa
> > > > <ricordisa...@openmailbox.org> wrote:
> > > > > Il 21/03/2016 13:14, Marc A. Pelletier ha scritto:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On 2016-03-21 8:03 AM, Ricordisamoa wrote:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> As in [1] I'd like to know whether the use of Shopify is
> > acceptable for
> > > > a
> > > > >>> FOSS-friendly organization. Thanks in advance.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> While Shopify isn't FLOSS-only, they're a fairly okay place that
> > does
> > > > >> contribute to FLOSS themselves (mostly in the Ruby and Go worlds,
> > that
> > > > >> intersect very little with our own tech).
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I don't think it's reasonable to expect that every external
> > supplier is
> > > > >> all-FLOSS.  For one, the movement would be pretty much stuck
> without
> > > > >> hardware, networking gear, and power at the very least.  Not every
> > > > >> service/provider even *have* pure-FLOSS alternative - let alone
> > good or
> > > > even
> > > > >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Joseph Seddon]

Steinsplitter,

There has been and continues to be a long standing desire from volunteers
and donors to get merchandise whether through events, competitions,
giveaways or purchasing. The fact we get 1000+ orders or so a year (an
educated guess) shows the idea of the store has merits. It might not be for
everyone but if it serves those who use it and it's self sufficient then I
don't see many negatives of having one. Especially if we ensure there are
multiple other avenues for users to get such merchandise, especially to
ensure that cost is not a limiting factor within our movement. It would be
great if the store could fund all such merchandise giveaways.

Seddon

On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 7:39 PM, Steinsplitter Wiki <
steinsplitter-w...@live.com> wrote:

> Why do we need such a Shop?
>
> (I must admit that i tested the job a year ago, the product was fine, the
> shipment fast. A bit expensive for my taste.)
>
> I agree with other users that the shop schould be hosted on wikimedia
> servers.
>
> --Steinsplitter
>
> > Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2016 17:41:46 +0100
> > From: rupert.thur...@gmail.com
> > To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?
> >
> > How many orders are handled by this shop?
> >
> > Rupert
> > On Mar 21, 2016 17:32, "Joseph Seddon" <jsed...@wikimedia.org> wrote:
> >
> > > In an ideal world then I would definitely be pushing for a fully
> wikimedia
> > > hosted online shop. I completely agree with the principles you've
> raised.
> > > But moving in-house would require resources for building and
> maintaining an
> > > ecommerce workflow that I don't think we collectively can justify. The
> > > setup and maintenance of any solution would require a degree of people
> > > power that I personally think could be spent better elsewhere in the
> > > movement as I am sure you would agree.
> > >
> > > Throwing together an e-commerce site can be easy. But doing it well,
> > > ensuring you are PCI compliant, ensuring its stable, secure etc. etc.
> and
> > > making it user friendly both front and back end. That takes time and
> money.
> > > Even if we did all that we would still in end up using a third party
> > > payment gateway. To ensure the shop is viable and not a drain we need
> to
> > > keep it as efficient as possible.
> > >
> > > As Marc said Shopify may not be completely FLOSS but many of the
> frameworks
> > > that Shopify use in their hosted service are on available on Github
> [1] and
> > > I would encourage you to take a look.
> > >
> > > With regards to the URL, I as a customer would find a top 10 website
> > > sending me to a third party URL for their shop highly suspicious and I
> > > certainly could treat it with suspicion. Making it clear that it is
> hosted
> > > by shopify I think would at least improve the situation.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > >
> > > Seddon
> > >
> > > On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 7:34 PM, Ricordisamoa
> > > <ricordisa...@openmailbox.org> wrote:
> > > > Il 21/03/2016 13:14, Marc A. Pelletier ha scritto:
> > > >>
> > > >> On 2016-03-21 8:03 AM, Ricordisamoa wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> As in [1] I'd like to know whether the use of Shopify is
> acceptable for
> > > a
> > > >>> FOSS-friendly organization. Thanks in advance.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> While Shopify isn't FLOSS-only, they're a fairly okay place that
> does
> > > >> contribute to FLOSS themselves (mostly in the Ruby and Go worlds,
> that
> > > >> intersect very little with our own tech).
> > > >>
> > > >> I don't think it's reasonable to expect that every external
> supplier is
> > > >> all-FLOSS.  For one, the movement would be pretty much stuck without
> > > >> hardware, networking gear, and power at the very least.  Not every
> > > >> service/provider even *have* pure-FLOSS alternative - let alone
> good or
> > > even
> > > >> adequate ones.
> > > >>
> > > >> -- Coren / Marc
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > My concern was about the (likely proprietary) JavaScript that is run
> on
> > > the
> > > > customers' devices, but it turns out that it isn't actually required
> to
> > > > browse and purchase?
> > >
> > > I very quickly looked, and it appears to 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
Have you considered the cost? It is not free to run a shop. When another
organisation can do it for you for less, it would be not good to have an
own shop on principles only.
Thanks,
  GerardM

On 21 March 2016 at 20:39, Steinsplitter Wiki <steinsplitter-w...@live.com>
wrote:

> Why do we need such a Shop?
>
> (I must admit that i tested the job a year ago, the product was fine, the
> shipment fast. A bit expensive for my taste.)
>
> I agree with other users that the shop schould be hosted on wikimedia
> servers.
>
> --Steinsplitter
>
> > Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2016 17:41:46 +0100
> > From: rupert.thur...@gmail.com
> > To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?
> >
> > How many orders are handled by this shop?
> >
> > Rupert
> > On Mar 21, 2016 17:32, "Joseph Seddon" <jsed...@wikimedia.org> wrote:
> >
> > > In an ideal world then I would definitely be pushing for a fully
> wikimedia
> > > hosted online shop. I completely agree with the principles you've
> raised.
> > > But moving in-house would require resources for building and
> maintaining an
> > > ecommerce workflow that I don't think we collectively can justify. The
> > > setup and maintenance of any solution would require a degree of people
> > > power that I personally think could be spent better elsewhere in the
> > > movement as I am sure you would agree.
> > >
> > > Throwing together an e-commerce site can be easy. But doing it well,
> > > ensuring you are PCI compliant, ensuring its stable, secure etc. etc.
> and
> > > making it user friendly both front and back end. That takes time and
> money.
> > > Even if we did all that we would still in end up using a third party
> > > payment gateway. To ensure the shop is viable and not a drain we need
> to
> > > keep it as efficient as possible.
> > >
> > > As Marc said Shopify may not be completely FLOSS but many of the
> frameworks
> > > that Shopify use in their hosted service are on available on Github
> [1] and
> > > I would encourage you to take a look.
> > >
> > > With regards to the URL, I as a customer would find a top 10 website
> > > sending me to a third party URL for their shop highly suspicious and I
> > > certainly could treat it with suspicion. Making it clear that it is
> hosted
> > > by shopify I think would at least improve the situation.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > >
> > > Seddon
> > >
> > > On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 7:34 PM, Ricordisamoa
> > > <ricordisa...@openmailbox.org> wrote:
> > > > Il 21/03/2016 13:14, Marc A. Pelletier ha scritto:
> > > >>
> > > >> On 2016-03-21 8:03 AM, Ricordisamoa wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> As in [1] I'd like to know whether the use of Shopify is
> acceptable for
> > > a
> > > >>> FOSS-friendly organization. Thanks in advance.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> While Shopify isn't FLOSS-only, they're a fairly okay place that
> does
> > > >> contribute to FLOSS themselves (mostly in the Ruby and Go worlds,
> that
> > > >> intersect very little with our own tech).
> > > >>
> > > >> I don't think it's reasonable to expect that every external
> supplier is
> > > >> all-FLOSS.  For one, the movement would be pretty much stuck without
> > > >> hardware, networking gear, and power at the very least.  Not every
> > > >> service/provider even *have* pure-FLOSS alternative - let alone
> good or
> > > even
> > > >> adequate ones.
> > > >>
> > > >> -- Coren / Marc
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > My concern was about the (likely proprietary) JavaScript that is run
> on
> > > the
> > > > customers' devices, but it turns out that it isn't actually required
> to
> > > > browse and purchase?
> > >
> > > I very quickly looked, and it appears to be mostly open libraries and
> > > Shopify specific code for making purchases.
> > > However any amount of tracking could be hidden somewhere in their
> > > JavaScript, and an audit today doesnt mean it is safe to use tomorrow,
> > > as the source code is not publicly reviewed before being deployed.
> > >
> > > > And yes, it'd be nice if the server side was under WMF's control too!
> > >
> &g

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Steinsplitter Wiki]

Why do we need such a Shop?

(I must admit that i tested the job a year ago, the product was fine, the 
shipment fast. A bit expensive for my taste.)

I agree with other users that the shop schould be hosted on wikimedia servers.

--Steinsplitter

> Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2016 17:41:46 +0100
> From: rupert.thur...@gmail.com
> To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?
> 
> How many orders are handled by this shop?
> 
> Rupert
> On Mar 21, 2016 17:32, "Joseph Seddon" <jsed...@wikimedia.org> wrote:
> 
> > In an ideal world then I would definitely be pushing for a fully wikimedia
> > hosted online shop. I completely agree with the principles you've raised.
> > But moving in-house would require resources for building and maintaining an
> > ecommerce workflow that I don't think we collectively can justify. The
> > setup and maintenance of any solution would require a degree of people
> > power that I personally think could be spent better elsewhere in the
> > movement as I am sure you would agree.
> >
> > Throwing together an e-commerce site can be easy. But doing it well,
> > ensuring you are PCI compliant, ensuring its stable, secure etc. etc. and
> > making it user friendly both front and back end. That takes time and money.
> > Even if we did all that we would still in end up using a third party
> > payment gateway. To ensure the shop is viable and not a drain we need to
> > keep it as efficient as possible.
> >
> > As Marc said Shopify may not be completely FLOSS but many of the frameworks
> > that Shopify use in their hosted service are on available on Github [1] and
> > I would encourage you to take a look.
> >
> > With regards to the URL, I as a customer would find a top 10 website
> > sending me to a third party URL for their shop highly suspicious and I
> > certainly could treat it with suspicion. Making it clear that it is hosted
> > by shopify I think would at least improve the situation.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Seddon
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 7:34 PM, Ricordisamoa
> > <ricordisa...@openmailbox.org> wrote:
> > > Il 21/03/2016 13:14, Marc A. Pelletier ha scritto:
> > >>
> > >> On 2016-03-21 8:03 AM, Ricordisamoa wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> As in [1] I'd like to know whether the use of Shopify is acceptable for
> > a
> > >>> FOSS-friendly organization. Thanks in advance.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> While Shopify isn't FLOSS-only, they're a fairly okay place that does
> > >> contribute to FLOSS themselves (mostly in the Ruby and Go worlds, that
> > >> intersect very little with our own tech).
> > >>
> > >> I don't think it's reasonable to expect that every external supplier is
> > >> all-FLOSS.  For one, the movement would be pretty much stuck without
> > >> hardware, networking gear, and power at the very least.  Not every
> > >> service/provider even *have* pure-FLOSS alternative - let alone good or
> > even
> > >> adequate ones.
> > >>
> > >> -- Coren / Marc
> > >>
> > >
> > > My concern was about the (likely proprietary) JavaScript that is run on
> > the
> > > customers' devices, but it turns out that it isn't actually required to
> > > browse and purchase?
> >
> > I very quickly looked, and it appears to be mostly open libraries and
> > Shopify specific code for making purchases.
> > However any amount of tracking could be hidden somewhere in their
> > JavaScript, and an audit today doesnt mean it is safe to use tomorrow,
> > as the source code is not publicly reviewed before being deployed.
> >
> > > And yes, it'd be nice if the server side was under WMF's control too!
> >
> > IMO it is more important that any service on the "wikimedia.org"
> > domain (and others owned by WMF) is free software.
> >
> > Outsourcing the service provision is fine, provided the software is
> > free software and the delegated service provider abides by our terms
> > of use and privacy policy.
> >
> > If we need to run non-free services, that isnt free software or can't
> > comply with our terms of use and privacy policy, it should be hosted
> > on a different domain, preferrably the domain of the service provider
> > so that it is abundantly clear who the transaction is really with.
> >
> > --
> > John Vandenberg
> >
> > _

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Joseph Seddon]

I don't have numbers of orders to hand but revenue projections for the
store can be seen on Slide 12 here:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1b/WMF_Advancement_and_Fundraising_Tech_quarterly_review_-_Q2_FY2015-16.pdf

FY 15/16 Projections:

Gross Revenue: $74,383.34
Net Revenue: $29,933.74

Regards
Seddon

On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 4:41 PM, rupert THURNER 
wrote:

> How many orders are handled by this shop?
>
> Rupert
> On Mar 21, 2016 17:32, "Joseph Seddon"  wrote:
>
> > In an ideal world then I would definitely be pushing for a fully
> wikimedia
> > hosted online shop. I completely agree with the principles you've raised.
> > But moving in-house would require resources for building and maintaining
> an
> > ecommerce workflow that I don't think we collectively can justify. The
> > setup and maintenance of any solution would require a degree of people
> > power that I personally think could be spent better elsewhere in the
> > movement as I am sure you would agree.
> >
> > Throwing together an e-commerce site can be easy. But doing it well,
> > ensuring you are PCI compliant, ensuring its stable, secure etc. etc. and
> > making it user friendly both front and back end. That takes time and
> money.
> > Even if we did all that we would still in end up using a third party
> > payment gateway. To ensure the shop is viable and not a drain we need to
> > keep it as efficient as possible.
> >
> > As Marc said Shopify may not be completely FLOSS but many of the
> frameworks
> > that Shopify use in their hosted service are on available on Github [1]
> and
> > I would encourage you to take a look.
> >
> > With regards to the URL, I as a customer would find a top 10 website
> > sending me to a third party URL for their shop highly suspicious and I
> > certainly could treat it with suspicion. Making it clear that it is
> hosted
> > by shopify I think would at least improve the situation.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Seddon
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 7:34 PM, Ricordisamoa
> >  wrote:
> > > Il 21/03/2016 13:14, Marc A. Pelletier ha scritto:
> > >>
> > >> On 2016-03-21 8:03 AM, Ricordisamoa wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> As in [1] I'd like to know whether the use of Shopify is acceptable
> for
> > a
> > >>> FOSS-friendly organization. Thanks in advance.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> While Shopify isn't FLOSS-only, they're a fairly okay place that does
> > >> contribute to FLOSS themselves (mostly in the Ruby and Go worlds, that
> > >> intersect very little with our own tech).
> > >>
> > >> I don't think it's reasonable to expect that every external supplier
> is
> > >> all-FLOSS.  For one, the movement would be pretty much stuck without
> > >> hardware, networking gear, and power at the very least.  Not every
> > >> service/provider even *have* pure-FLOSS alternative - let alone good
> or
> > even
> > >> adequate ones.
> > >>
> > >> -- Coren / Marc
> > >>
> > >
> > > My concern was about the (likely proprietary) JavaScript that is run on
> > the
> > > customers' devices, but it turns out that it isn't actually required to
> > > browse and purchase?
> >
> > I very quickly looked, and it appears to be mostly open libraries and
> > Shopify specific code for making purchases.
> > However any amount of tracking could be hidden somewhere in their
> > JavaScript, and an audit today doesnt mean it is safe to use tomorrow,
> > as the source code is not publicly reviewed before being deployed.
> >
> > > And yes, it'd be nice if the server side was under WMF's control too!
> >
> > IMO it is more important that any service on the "wikimedia.org"
> > domain (and others owned by WMF) is free software.
> >
> > Outsourcing the service provision is fine, provided the software is
> > free software and the delegated service provider abides by our terms
> > of use and privacy policy.
> >
> > If we need to run non-free services, that isnt free software or can't
> > comply with our terms of use and privacy policy, it should be hosted
> > on a different domain, preferrably the domain of the service provider
> > so that it is abundantly clear who the transaction is really with.
> >
> > --
> > John Vandenberg
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> ___
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[rupert THURNER]

How many orders are handled by this shop?

Rupert
On Mar 21, 2016 17:32, "Joseph Seddon"  wrote:

> In an ideal world then I would definitely be pushing for a fully wikimedia
> hosted online shop. I completely agree with the principles you've raised.
> But moving in-house would require resources for building and maintaining an
> ecommerce workflow that I don't think we collectively can justify. The
> setup and maintenance of any solution would require a degree of people
> power that I personally think could be spent better elsewhere in the
> movement as I am sure you would agree.
>
> Throwing together an e-commerce site can be easy. But doing it well,
> ensuring you are PCI compliant, ensuring its stable, secure etc. etc. and
> making it user friendly both front and back end. That takes time and money.
> Even if we did all that we would still in end up using a third party
> payment gateway. To ensure the shop is viable and not a drain we need to
> keep it as efficient as possible.
>
> As Marc said Shopify may not be completely FLOSS but many of the frameworks
> that Shopify use in their hosted service are on available on Github [1] and
> I would encourage you to take a look.
>
> With regards to the URL, I as a customer would find a top 10 website
> sending me to a third party URL for their shop highly suspicious and I
> certainly could treat it with suspicion. Making it clear that it is hosted
> by shopify I think would at least improve the situation.
>
> Regards
>
> Seddon
>
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 7:34 PM, Ricordisamoa
>  wrote:
> > Il 21/03/2016 13:14, Marc A. Pelletier ha scritto:
> >>
> >> On 2016-03-21 8:03 AM, Ricordisamoa wrote:
> >>>
> >>> As in [1] I'd like to know whether the use of Shopify is acceptable for
> a
> >>> FOSS-friendly organization. Thanks in advance.
> >>
> >>
> >> While Shopify isn't FLOSS-only, they're a fairly okay place that does
> >> contribute to FLOSS themselves (mostly in the Ruby and Go worlds, that
> >> intersect very little with our own tech).
> >>
> >> I don't think it's reasonable to expect that every external supplier is
> >> all-FLOSS.  For one, the movement would be pretty much stuck without
> >> hardware, networking gear, and power at the very least.  Not every
> >> service/provider even *have* pure-FLOSS alternative - let alone good or
> even
> >> adequate ones.
> >>
> >> -- Coren / Marc
> >>
> >
> > My concern was about the (likely proprietary) JavaScript that is run on
> the
> > customers' devices, but it turns out that it isn't actually required to
> > browse and purchase?
>
> I very quickly looked, and it appears to be mostly open libraries and
> Shopify specific code for making purchases.
> However any amount of tracking could be hidden somewhere in their
> JavaScript, and an audit today doesnt mean it is safe to use tomorrow,
> as the source code is not publicly reviewed before being deployed.
>
> > And yes, it'd be nice if the server side was under WMF's control too!
>
> IMO it is more important that any service on the "wikimedia.org"
> domain (and others owned by WMF) is free software.
>
> Outsourcing the service provision is fine, provided the software is
> free software and the delegated service provider abides by our terms
> of use and privacy policy.
>
> If we need to run non-free services, that isnt free software or can't
> comply with our terms of use and privacy policy, it should be hosted
> on a different domain, preferrably the domain of the service provider
> so that it is abundantly clear who the transaction is really with.
>
> --
> John Vandenberg
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Joseph Seddon]

In an ideal world then I would definitely be pushing for a fully wikimedia
hosted online shop. I completely agree with the principles you've raised.
But moving in-house would require resources for building and maintaining an
ecommerce workflow that I don't think we collectively can justify. The
setup and maintenance of any solution would require a degree of people
power that I personally think could be spent better elsewhere in the
movement as I am sure you would agree.

Throwing together an e-commerce site can be easy. But doing it well,
ensuring you are PCI compliant, ensuring its stable, secure etc. etc. and
making it user friendly both front and back end. That takes time and money.
Even if we did all that we would still in end up using a third party
payment gateway. To ensure the shop is viable and not a drain we need to
keep it as efficient as possible.

As Marc said Shopify may not be completely FLOSS but many of the frameworks
that Shopify use in their hosted service are on available on Github [1] and
I would encourage you to take a look.

With regards to the URL, I as a customer would find a top 10 website
sending me to a third party URL for their shop highly suspicious and I
certainly could treat it with suspicion. Making it clear that it is hosted
by shopify I think would at least improve the situation.

Regards

Seddon

On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 7:34 PM, Ricordisamoa
 wrote:
> Il 21/03/2016 13:14, Marc A. Pelletier ha scritto:
>>
>> On 2016-03-21 8:03 AM, Ricordisamoa wrote:
>>>
>>> As in [1] I'd like to know whether the use of Shopify is acceptable for
a
>>> FOSS-friendly organization. Thanks in advance.
>>
>>
>> While Shopify isn't FLOSS-only, they're a fairly okay place that does
>> contribute to FLOSS themselves (mostly in the Ruby and Go worlds, that
>> intersect very little with our own tech).
>>
>> I don't think it's reasonable to expect that every external supplier is
>> all-FLOSS.  For one, the movement would be pretty much stuck without
>> hardware, networking gear, and power at the very least.  Not every
>> service/provider even *have* pure-FLOSS alternative - let alone good or
even
>> adequate ones.
>>
>> -- Coren / Marc
>>
>
> My concern was about the (likely proprietary) JavaScript that is run on
the
> customers' devices, but it turns out that it isn't actually required to
> browse and purchase?

I very quickly looked, and it appears to be mostly open libraries and
Shopify specific code for making purchases.
However any amount of tracking could be hidden somewhere in their
JavaScript, and an audit today doesnt mean it is safe to use tomorrow,
as the source code is not publicly reviewed before being deployed.

> And yes, it'd be nice if the server side was under WMF's control too!

IMO it is more important that any service on the "wikimedia.org"
domain (and others owned by WMF) is free software.

Outsourcing the service provision is fine, provided the software is
free software and the delegated service provider abides by our terms
of use and privacy policy.

If we need to run non-free services, that isnt free software or can't
comply with our terms of use and privacy policy, it should be hosted
on a different domain, preferrably the domain of the service provider
so that it is abundantly clear who the transaction is really with.

--
John Vandenberg

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Joseph Seddon]

What your saying makes sense. I'll take a look into this Jon and get back
to you as soon as I can.

Seddon
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Joseph Seddon 
wrote:
> Hey Florence,
>
> Regarding your first question the shop is Foundation owned and run but
> hosted by Shopify, an e-commerce provider. [1] The orders are then sent to
> our fulfillment partner, SWAGBOT. [2]

That it is run by Shopify appears to only be stated on the shipping page:
http://store.wikimedia.org/pages/shipping

https://www.google.com/search?q=shopify+site%3Astore.wikimedia.org

I think it would be appropriate to explicitly & prominently mention this on

https://store.wikimedia.org/pages/terms-of-service
https://store.wikimedia.org/pages/privacy-policy

Especially the Privacy policy, since it says

"The Wikipedia store is operated by third-party service providers,
and, as part of their operations, they may process your information.
Please consult their privacy policies for further information."

And then doesnt say who those third party service providers are.

Here in Indonesia, when I go to https://shopify.com, I am forcibly
sent to https://www.shopify.co.id/ , and when I click on Terms of Use
or Privacy I am sent to 404 pages.

https://www.shopify.co.id/legal/terms
https://www.shopify.co.id/legal/privacy

--
John Vandenberg

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[John Mark Vandenberg]

On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 7:34 PM, Ricordisamoa
 wrote:
> Il 21/03/2016 13:14, Marc A. Pelletier ha scritto:
>>
>> On 2016-03-21 8:03 AM, Ricordisamoa wrote:
>>>
>>> As in [1] I'd like to know whether the use of Shopify is acceptable for a
>>> FOSS-friendly organization. Thanks in advance.
>>
>>
>> While Shopify isn't FLOSS-only, they're a fairly okay place that does
>> contribute to FLOSS themselves (mostly in the Ruby and Go worlds, that
>> intersect very little with our own tech).
>>
>> I don't think it's reasonable to expect that every external supplier is
>> all-FLOSS.  For one, the movement would be pretty much stuck without
>> hardware, networking gear, and power at the very least.  Not every
>> service/provider even *have* pure-FLOSS alternative - let alone good or even
>> adequate ones.
>>
>> -- Coren / Marc
>>
>
> My concern was about the (likely proprietary) JavaScript that is run on the
> customers' devices, but it turns out that it isn't actually required to
> browse and purchase?

I very quickly looked, and it appears to be mostly open libraries and
Shopify specific code for making purchases.
However any amount of tracking could be hidden somewhere in their
JavaScript, and an audit today doesnt mean it is safe to use tomorrow,
as the source code is not publicly reviewed before being deployed.

> And yes, it'd be nice if the server side was under WMF's control too!

IMO it is more important that any service on the "wikimedia.org"
domain (and others owned by WMF) is free software.

Outsourcing the service provision is fine, provided the software is
free software and the delegated service provider abides by our terms
of use and privacy policy.

If we need to run non-free services, that isnt free software or can't
comply with our terms of use and privacy policy, it should be hosted
on a different domain, preferrably the domain of the service provider
so that it is abundantly clear who the transaction is really with.

-- 
John Vandenberg

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[John Mark Vandenberg]

On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Joseph Seddon  wrote:
> Hey Florence,
>
> Regarding your first question the shop is Foundation owned and run but
> hosted by Shopify, an e-commerce provider. [1] The orders are then sent to
> our fulfillment partner, SWAGBOT. [2]

That it is run by Shopify appears to only be stated on the shipping page:
http://store.wikimedia.org/pages/shipping

https://www.google.com/search?q=shopify+site%3Astore.wikimedia.org

I think it would be appropriate to explicitly & prominently mention this on

https://store.wikimedia.org/pages/terms-of-service
https://store.wikimedia.org/pages/privacy-policy

Especially the Privacy policy, since it says

"The Wikipedia store is operated by third-party service providers,
and, as part of their operations, they may process your information.
Please consult their privacy policies for further information."

And then doesnt say who those third party service providers are.

Here in Indonesia, when I go to https://shopify.com, I am forcibly
sent to https://www.shopify.co.id/ , and when I click on Terms of Use
or Privacy I am sent to 404 pages.

https://www.shopify.co.id/legal/terms
https://www.shopify.co.id/legal/privacy

--
John Vandenberg

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Marc A. Pelletier]

On 2016-03-21 8:34 AM, Ricordisamoa wrote:
And yes, it'd be nice if the server side was under WMF's control too! 


Yes, and no.

The extra control is hypothetically nice, but in practice one-off 
services that are different from the rest of the infrastructure (as a 
shop would be, like the blog, OTRS, etc) tend to be *extremely* 
expensive and difficult to care for, and tend to be the very weakest 
points of the system (including privacy and security).


There's a question of lack of specific expertise, of multiplication of 
moving parts, and of limited brain share to spread around a limited 
operations team.  I think it's wiser and safer to contract those out to 
a provider that (a) manages this as their core business and (b) is 
responsible for maintenance and security.  (The blog is a very good 
example of how much improvement can come as a result of delegating to a 
provider that actually has the expertise and resources to run the service).


There are cases - because of our privacy policy or because of how 
closely things tie into the rest of our infrastructure - where bringing 
in a one-off service is the best thing to do; but even those cases tend 
to be inordinately resource-heavy for their relative size so are best 
avoided when possible.


-- Coren / Marc


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Ricordisamoa]

Il 21/03/2016 13:14, Marc A. Pelletier ha scritto:

On 2016-03-21 8:03 AM, Ricordisamoa wrote:
As in [1] I'd like to know whether the use of Shopify is acceptable 
for a FOSS-friendly organization. Thanks in advance. 


While Shopify isn't FLOSS-only, they're a fairly okay place that does 
contribute to FLOSS themselves (mostly in the Ruby and Go worlds, that 
intersect very little with our own tech).


I don't think it's reasonable to expect that every external supplier 
is all-FLOSS.  For one, the movement would be pretty much stuck 
without hardware, networking gear, and power at the very least.  Not 
every service/provider even *have* pure-FLOSS alternative - let alone 
good or even adequate ones.


-- Coren / Marc



My concern was about the (likely proprietary) JavaScript that is run on 
the customers' devices, but it turns out that it isn't actually required 
to browse and purchase?

And yes, it'd be nice if the server side was under WMF's control too!

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Marc A. Pelletier]

On 2016-03-21 8:03 AM, Ricordisamoa wrote:
As in [1] I'd like to know whether the use of Shopify is acceptable 
for a FOSS-friendly organization. Thanks in advance. 


While Shopify isn't FLOSS-only, they're a fairly okay place that does 
contribute to FLOSS themselves (mostly in the Ruby and Go worlds, that 
intersect very little with our own tech).


I don't think it's reasonable to expect that every external supplier is 
all-FLOSS.  For one, the movement would be pretty much stuck without 
hardware, networking gear, and power at the very least.  Not every 
service/provider even *have* pure-FLOSS alternative - let alone good or 
even adequate ones.


-- Coren / Marc


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Ricordisamoa]

As in [1] I'd like to know whether the use of Shopify is acceptable for 
a FOSS-friendly organization. Thanks in advance.


[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_merchandise#Shopify.3F

Il 21/03/2016 11:28, Joseph Seddon ha scritto:

Hey Florence,

Regarding your first question the shop is Foundation owned and run but
hosted by Shopify, an e-commerce provider. [1] The orders are then sent to
our fulfillment partner, SWAGBOT. [2] We have a staff contractor, Gretchen
Holtman, who runs the shop for the Wikimedia Foundation. [3]

The email address is responded to by Wikimedia Foundation staff typically
either Gretchen for regarding issues surrounding the Wikimedia Shop, or
myself in relation to the merchandise giveaway scheme. [4]

Feel free to contact me off list if there is anything I can help you with.

Seddon

[1] https://www.shopify.co.uk/
[2] https://store.wikimedia.org/pages/our-fulfillment-company
[3]
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Staff_and_contractors#Fundraising_Operations
[4] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Merchandise_giveaways
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 9:47 AM, Florence Devouard 
wrote:


Is that directly run by Wikimedia Foundation staff or is that run by an
independant company "paid" by WMF to manage the shop ?

Who is behind the email address merchand...@wikimedia.org ?

Thank you

Florence


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,








___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Florence Devouard]

Thank you

I sent you a private email.

Flo

Le 21/03/16 11:28, Joseph Seddon a écrit :

Hey Florence,

Regarding your first question the shop is Foundation owned and run but
hosted by Shopify, an e-commerce provider. [1] The orders are then sent to
our fulfillment partner, SWAGBOT. [2] We have a staff contractor, Gretchen
Holtman, who runs the shop for the Wikimedia Foundation. [3]

The email address is responded to by Wikimedia Foundation staff typically
either Gretchen for regarding issues surrounding the Wikimedia Shop, or
myself in relation to the merchandise giveaway scheme. [4]

Feel free to contact me off list if there is anything I can help you with.

Seddon

[1] https://www.shopify.co.uk/
[2] https://store.wikimedia.org/pages/our-fulfillment-company
[3]
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Staff_and_contractors#Fundraising_Operations
[4] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Merchandise_giveaways
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 9:47 AM, Florence Devouard 
wrote:


Is that directly run by Wikimedia Foundation staff or is that run by an
independant company "paid" by WMF to manage the shop ?

Who is behind the email address merchand...@wikimedia.org ?

Thank you

Florence


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,










___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Florence Devouard]

Is that directly run by Wikimedia Foundation staff or is that run by an 
independant company "paid" by WMF to manage the shop ?


Who is behind the email address merchand...@wikimedia.org ?

Thank you

Florence


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,