I agree with Kirill, from the WMF point of view, as long as the chapter is informed and endorsed the creation of a user group within its covered territory, the WMF did its due diligence. After that, it is the responsibility of the chapter to do its homework about the local legal framework before endorsing the creation of the user group.
That being said, I would also be interested in hearing from Wikimedia UK's perspective on this new user group and the reasoning behind it. Jean-Philippe Béland Vice President, Wikimedia Canada Coordinator, Wikimedians of North American Indigenous Languages User Group On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 11:37 AM Kirill Lokshin <kirill.loks...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 9:29 AM, Fæ <fae...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On 20 March 2018 at 15:03, Kirill Lokshin <kirill.loks...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > Descriptions of user group activities on Meta shouldn't be interpreted > as > > > legal documents under UK law (or any other legal code, for that > matter). > > > > Hi Kirill, > > > > In the spirit of an open and transparent process, could you please > > provide a link to the scope of the new approved User Group is > > published, as the one on Meta is not the one that AffCom reviewed with > > the UG application? > > > > The Affiliations Committee publishes all of our application review and > approval resolutions on Meta; the one for the group in question can be > found at > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Resolutions/Recognition_Grŵp_Defnyddwyr_Cymuned_Wicimedia_Cymru > . > > > > > Any questions regarding potential legal implications for Wikimedia UK > > > should, of course, be directed to the chapter itself. > > > > This brush-off is surprising, with the clear implication that AffCom > > has not approached WMUK with any question. I was mistaken in believing > > that AffCom had a responsibility to consider obvious legal > > implications, before approving a User Group that is granted the right > > to use official logos and the name "Wikipedia" and its language > > variants when advertising their events. It is disappointing to see > > that AffCom does not see their official process as needing to address > > these areas, which may well be a barrier to direct funding, legal > > recognition or represent a risk to other named pre-existing Affiliates > > within the scope of the proposed new UG. > > > > Your implication is entirely incorrect; AffCom consulted with -- and > received an endorsement from -- Wikimedia UK prior to approving the user > group. However, we are neither experts in UK charity law nor empowered to > speak on behalf of Wikimedia UK; consequently, any questions regarding the > chapter's legal position should be posed to the chapter, not to us. > > Regards, > Kirill Lokshin > Chair, Affiliations Committee > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: Wikimediafirstname.lastname@example.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimediaemail@example.com Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>