Hi Gonçalo,

I have limited familiarity with the situation with Wikimedia Portugal, but
I am glad that there seems to be some movement on a path forward here.

I have had similar questions about WMF trademarks in the past. My quick
read of the trademark provisions that you included in your email is that
they may need clarification but I don't think of them as being "red flags"
that should stop progress.

I don't know what WMF's legal research has revealed regarding WMPT's
situation. My guess is that WMF is being understandably cautious about WMPT
until WMF has greater certainty about WMPT's governance. You could ask WMF
to explain why it made the proposal that it did.

I understand the concern about annual governance reviews. I would support
WMF providing sufficient (not lavish, but sufficient) grant funding for
WMPT to hire a contractor to perform the governance reviews that WMF wants.

Overall, I think that your concerns and questions are good and should be
discussed between WMPT, WMF Legal, and Affcom. I understand why you would
make these questions public and request input from the wider community.
Personally, I do not see "red flags" in the language that you quoted, and I
am glad to see that there seems to be some positive steps happening with
regards to the situation between WMPT, WMF, and Affcom. WMPT might consider
asking WMF for more favorable terms for the chapter agreement after a
period of time, perhaps six months to a few years, if WMPT seems to be
progressing in a good direction over that longer period of time. In the
time between now and January 31, I think that you are asking good questions
but I would not consider these issues to be "red flags" in the short term.

Best wishes,

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

Reply via email to