<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">2016-03-16 9:47 GMT+09:00 Venkatesh Raghavan <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:raghavan@media.osaka-cu.ac.jp" target="_blank">raghavan@media.osaka-cu.ac.jp</a>></span>:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div>Dear Board,<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">MOT7: Seek additional clarifications and
attend to this agenda item by e-mail within 7 working days
</blockquote>
<br>
Pending the approval of the above motion moved at<br>
the Board meeting held on 10 March, I would like to<br>
remind that we have two working days remaining<br>
to seek further clarification concerning the<br>
2017 Boston agreement & seed funding request and<br>
vote for board approval.<br></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>
<p class=""><span class="">+1 to approve request for FOSS4G 2017</span></p><p class=""><span class=""><br></span></p><p class=""><span class="">Sanghee </span></p></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"><div>
<br>
Considering the time available and also the fact that I<br>
do not intend to seek further clarification from my side,<br>
I would like to move the motion to approve the request<br>
from BLOC.<br>
<br>
Best<br>
<br>
Venka<span class=""><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 2016/03/15 21:17, Michael Terner wrote:<br>
</span></div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>Venka:
Thanks for the fair questions and thanks to the board for the serious
consideration of our request.
Steven, thanks for the general outline of a response and an enumeration of
our request. Your four points are entirely accurate and indeed several
people guided us to examine the Bonn agreement as a template for an
OSGeo/LOC agreement. This is precisely what we did, although in our case,
and unlike Bonn, the BLOC is not a legal entity and thus as with some past
conferences our PCO is part of the agreement as our "financial agent". So
here are a few additional details on the four main points:
1. *Names*: Our agreement has three parties: OSGeo, the Boston Location
Organizing Committee (BLOC) and Delaney Meeting & Event Management, our
PCO, who is acting as our financial agent.
2. *Seed funding*: We are asking for approval of up to maximum of
$70,000 of advances. As per the email threads, we anticipate doing this
through two separate requests. The first would be for $20,000 +/-
immediately following our hoped for approval of the agreement. The second
would be for the remaining $50,000 after the Bonn Conference concludes and
as we begin to ramp up at a faster pace (and as deposits come due).
3. *Additional guarantee*: Again, we followed the Bonn agreement model,
and as Steven points out the "total exposure" for OSGeo between the
advances and additional guarantee are the same for both Boston and Bonn. I
would also observe that the known precedent of OSGeo providing these
guarantees was something we considered strongly in forming our bid. Indeed,
both the BLOC and OSGeo are "in this together" with substantial "skin in
the game" and we are both strongly motivated for a superior and financially
successful event. We will work tirelessly to ensure Boston continues the
FOSS4G streak of being financially successful.
4. *Contractual clauses*: As has happened over the years, we would
certainly urge OSGeo to continue building on the template agreement and
these clauses provide important *mutual *protections as well as
providing a framework for cost-effective dispute resolution in the unlikely
event it is needed. They are standard clauses, but they also articulate
important principles.
Last, please consider the BLOC to have a strong +1 to Dirk's suggestion
that OSGeo look at an insurance approach for FOSS4G that could be designed
to cover future events and could leverage the good financial record of past
FOSS4G's. This would be one more thing that the "next conference" (e.g.,
2018) would not have to start from scratch with. Along those lines, we very
much appreciate Cameron resuscitating the "Priorities for Conference
Committee" thread, and anticipate chiming in over the coming weekend.
Indeed, the "starting from scratch" issues are something that are
resonating with our team.
Please let us know if you have any further questions, or need
clarifications on the points made above. We remain very hopeful that we can
receive Board approval *this week*. And, we are also hopeful that if we do
receive that approval it will be provided with some guidance on "what comes
next" in terms of putting signatures on the agreement and formally
initiating the financial request for an advance. The signatures part is
most important as we continue to face a near term deadline for signing an
agreement with our venue that will legally secure the date.
Thanks in advance...
MT & the BLOC
On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 4:19 AM, Dirk Frigne <a href="mailto:dirk.frigne@geosparc.com" target="_blank"><dirk.frigne@geosparc.com></a>
wrote:
</pre><div><div class="h5">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>Thank you Steven,
This is a clear statement and an improvement of the contract in relation
to last year in relation to exposed risk.
i.m.h.o. this should pass the board's decision for this event. If the
board should have still questions about the contract in general, we
should discuss them and formulate an advise for improvement for future
events.
One improvement could be that OSGeo get insured for the extra exposed
risk (for future events), based on the financial history of all the
FOSS4G events in the past.
Dirk.
On 14-03-16 16:39, Steven Feldman wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>Venda, Board
The proposed agreement is identical to the one that OSGeo has entered
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre>into with Bonn for 2016, with the following variations:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>1. The names
2. The seed funding is up to £70,000 not $57.500
3. The advance is for up to $45,000 not $57,500 (overall the total
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre>exposure is the same as 2016 at $115,000)
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>4. The insertion of Mitigation, Indemnification and Arbitration clauses
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre>which I understand are standard clauses in US agreements of this type and
apply equally to both parties.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>The additional guarantee is intended to cover the very unlikely
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre>circumstance that the FOSS4G is financially unsuccessful. If the event
loses money OSGeo is at risk of losing our seed money and an additional
$45,000 up to a maximum exposure of $115,000. This agreement limits our
exposure to $115,000 previously we had potentially unlimited exposure.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>I hope this helps the board in considering this motion
Cheers
______
Steven
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>On 14 Mar 2016, at 14:36, Venkatesh Raghavan <a href="mailto:venka.osgeo@gmail.com" target="_blank"><venka.osgeo@gmail.com></a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>Dear Micheal, Guido and all,
The agreement of seed funding was presented by Guido
at the Board meeting on 10 March, 2016 and the Board
members requested for further clarification especially
about the "additional guarantee".
Since all the board members are not following conference
mailing list, I would request that Micheal of Guido
to provide a brief summary of the request including
clarification on the "additional guarantee" and also
link to any relevant documents. This will help the
board members to get a clearer understanding and
facilitate to taking timely decision.
Thanks in advance.
Best
Venka
On 2016/03/10 2:51, Michael Terner wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>Eli:
Thanks for the pointer to SVN, Guido is versed in these technologies
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>and
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>will act as our "user" and POC on this (and you've seen he's already
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>chimed
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>in to this effect). We will do our part to document our experiences and
make everything available via SVN.
Also, apologies for the "FOSSGIS e.V." reference; we understood what
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>it was
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>and attempted to excise them all from "our version" of the document.
Apparently we missed one so thanks for the heads-up. As per Steven's
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>note,
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>his latest version with the lower "additional guarantee" amount should
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>have
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>this corrected already.
Thanks again to all for your assistance on this.
MT
On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 12:30 PM, Guido Stein <a href="mailto:gstein@appgeo.com" target="_blank"><gstein@appgeo.com></a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre></pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>Hey Eli,
I would be happy to help with this.
Let me know the credentials and I will do my best to update as we get
these official documents squared away.
-guido
On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 12:22 PM Eli Adam <a href="mailto:eadam@co.lincoln.or.us" target="_blank"><eadam@co.lincoln.or.us></a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre></pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>Hi Michael,
Are you or someone on the BLOC able to use svn? If so, I'd like to
give them access to <a href="http://svn.osgeo.org/osgeo/foss4g/" target="_blank">http://svn.osgeo.org/osgeo/foss4g/</a> so that
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>things
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>like these documents can be stored there (at least once finalized and
approved).
"FOSSGIS e.V." is a German organization/corporation/nonprofit
associated with the FOSSGIS conference and Bonn LOC. They are not a
party to this agreement and all mention of them should be removed.
Please revised the documents accordingly.
Eli
On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 6:20 AM, Michael Terner <a href="mailto:mgt@appgeo.com" target="_blank"><mgt@appgeo.com></a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>Steven:
Thanks for keeping this moving and the good questions, suggestions
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>and
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>observations.
Board:
Thanks very much for taking this up on short notice. We really
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre>appreciate
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>the attention.
To Steven's questions/suggestions:
YES, we are comfortable changing the "additional guarantee"
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>downward to
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>match the Bonn "total value." Indeed, we were "connecting the dots"
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre>based on
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>the Bonn template, and had not completed a full risk assessment.
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>Steven
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>makes a very good point that the "insurance policies" that we can
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>pursue
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>after we have an agreement will help better quantify "actual risk"
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>and
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>exposure. We are comfortable proceeding with what Steven proposes
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>(i.e.,
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>$115k max), and if we feel an alteration is necessary/warranted
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>we'll
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>bring
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>that back to conference dev at a later time. Indeed, our nearest
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>term
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>need
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>is to formally enter into agreement so that we can secure our venue
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>via
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>our
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>PCO. So, YES, $115k (i.e., $70k advance, $45k "additional
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>guarantee") is
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>good. Thank you.
YES, we appreciate your understanding and open mindedness to the
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>legal
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>clauses (thank you Darrell for the +1 on that). Ultimately, these
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>all
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>protect both OSGeo and the LOC/PCO and/or show a preference for
non-litigious dispute resolution. Over time, these might be
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>considered
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>as
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>additions to the "template agreement". And, we welcome further
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre>review/input
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>from people familiar with contracts/agreements.
As Steven relays, our PCO reviewed and was comfortable with the
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre>agreement's
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>existing language on guarantees. She only asked that the additional
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre>clauses
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>be added. And, as per above, if we perform a more detailed risk
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre>assessment
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>it sounds like there is an avenue to re-approach Conf Dev on
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>increasing
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>the
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>guarantee.
Indeed, OSGeo's very good 10 year record of having strong
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>conferences
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>should
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>help moderate insurance costs. And the BLOC has every intention of
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre>extending
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>that success with Boston.
Sincerely and with thanks...
MT & the BLOC
On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 7:24 AM, Steven Feldman <<a href="mailto:shfeldman@gmail.com" target="_blank">shfeldman@gmail.com</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre></pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>Michael
The additional guarantee for Bonn was based upon a risk analysis at
different points in the build up to the conference and an estimate
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>of
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>the
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>maximum exposure if the event had to be cancelled or proceeded
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>with a
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>lower
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>than viable attendance. It was not automatically equal to the seed
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>funding.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>I don’t want to just negotiate you down to a lower figure. Can you
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>and
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>your PCO consider the exposure at different points and come up
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>with a
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>revised additional guarantee that you need. If you will be
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>offsetting
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>any
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>additional risk through an insurance policy it might be worth
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>exploring the
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>premium versus excess ratios to come up with the most efficient
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>balance
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>between an OSGeo additional guarantee and insurance.
In my motion to the CC I asked for approval for the seed funds but
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>did
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>not
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>mention the ‘additional guarantee’. Given time pressures I am
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>going to
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>submit a proposal to the Board for consideration at tomorrow
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>meeting
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>for
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>seed funds of $70k and an additional guarantee of up to $45k i.e. a
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>total
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>exposure of $115k which is the same level of guarantee offered to
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>Bonn
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>for
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>this year. If you come up with a different level of additional
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>guarantee or
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>the CC objects I will have to go back to the board and ask them to
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>adapt the
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>motion subsequently.
Darrell has suggested, in a separate mail in this thread, that the
additional ‘legal’ paras are standard clauses, unless someone else
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>objects I
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>am happy to forward the agreement (with additional guarantee
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>amended)
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>to the
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>board for approval.
Darrell also raised the question of how OSGeo can limit it’s
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>liability
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>in
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>the event that the PCO or the LOC undertakes irrevocable
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>commitments in
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>excess of the agreed sum. My understanding is that the agreement is
primarily between OSGeo and the PCO with the LOC acting as our
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>agent,
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>the
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>PCO by signing this agreement accepts that OSGeo liability is
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>limited
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>to
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>$115k (or whatever sum we agree) and will take necessary steps
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>(i.e.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>insurance to mitigate any risks). While we there is some
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>uncertainty
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>about
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>the enforceability of this agreement or its outcome, it is a lot
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>better than
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>we had previously where nearly everything was done on the basis of
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>a
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>‘gentleman’s agreement’ - that said, so far no global FOSS4G has
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>had
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>to call
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>on OSGeo to bail them out.
I have copied the Board into this mail so that they are fully
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>aware of
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>the
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>background and our discussions.
Cheers
______
Steven
On 8 Mar 2016, at 20:42, Michael Terner <a href="mailto:mgt@appgeo.com" target="_blank"><mgt@appgeo.com></a> wrote:
Totally fair questions. Here's where these things came from:
Regarding the "advance" and the guarantee: We followed the form of
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>how
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>Bonn was setup. In the Bonn template "schedule" that was shared
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>with us
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>there was $57,500 for the "advance" and $57,500 for the "additional
guarantee". Then the schedule identified $115,000 for the "Maximum
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>total
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>OSGeo financial exposure.". The previous threads had identified
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>our
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>total
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>"maximum advance" as $70,000 (that we would seek in two
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>installments).
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>Since
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>the "additional guarantee" had not been discussed explicitly I
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>followed the
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>"Bonn model" and had the additional guarantee match the advance
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>payment,
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>i.e., the $70,000; for a total exposure of $140,000. If that's not
appropriate, or the "additional guarantee"; or "total exposure"
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>needs
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>to
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>back down we will figure it out with your guidance.
Regarding the "legal" language: In reviewing the Bonn agreement we
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>were
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>both pleased and a little surprised that there weren't more "terms
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>and
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>conditions". We're all for simplicity and clarity. That said, our
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>PCO,
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>Delaney Meeting & Event Management (DMEM) made these suggestions as
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>they
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>will be a signatory to the agreement. In short, these are common
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>sense
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>protections that are routine in almost all contracts. We certainly
understand and respect your potential need to have additional
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>review,
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>and we
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>certainly reviewed the language but did not feel that engaging
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>legal
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>counsel
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>was necessary due to the fact that these clauses are so commonplace
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>(i.e., I
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>have seen this language many times before) and because they protect
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>both
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>parties to the agreement. Here's my layman's summary of what they
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>mean
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>and
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>why they are important (and this is in no way is designed to
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>dissuade
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>you
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>from getting the reviews OSGeo thinks are necessary):
Mitigation Clause/Force Majeure: If something terrible and beyond
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>the
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>control of either of us happens (e.g., crazy weather; terrorism
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>that
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>locks
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>down travel; etc.) that causes the event to be cancelled late in
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>the
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>game,
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>there is a means to do that. As per later in the document, we will
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>have
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>"cancellation insurance" so that if this happens neither party
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>loses
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>already
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>spent $'s.
Indemnification: Is a mutual protection that if either party is
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>acting
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>in
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>bad faith or shows negligence or blatant incompetence, that causes
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>damage
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>and as a result the other party (i.e., the one that did not cause
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>the
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>problem) is sued, the party at fault is responsible for those
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>damages
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>and
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>must indemnify the non-responsible party.
Arbitration: If there is a dispute, this clause indicates that it
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>will
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>be
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>resolved through arbitration, as opposed to a lawsuit. Arbitration
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>is
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>generally a quicker and less costly process (at least in the USA).
Event insurance: We will obtain insurance to cover both
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>cancellation
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>exposure and liability that may result from this event. This is
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>commonplace
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>and our PCO is familiar with these types of policies and affordable
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>means of
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>obtaining them. These costs are included in our budget.
Even with these additions, this agreement remains very lean.
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>Obviously, we
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>do not want to add unnecessary complexity or slow things down.
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>Rather,
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>our
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>intent is to have a solid agreement that protects both parties and
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>helps to
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>cement a productive and collaborative partnership.
Please let us know if there's any other information you require; or
anything else we can do to clarify things. If this needs more
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>thorough
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>and
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>time consuming review we regret that, but also accept it.
Please let us know what comes next, and in particular whether we
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>should
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>revise our request for the size of the "additional guarantee".
Thanks to all for the work you're putting into this...
MT
On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 3:04 PM, Steven Feldman <
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre><a href="mailto:shfeldman@gmail.com" target="_blank">shfeldman@gmail.com</a>>
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>Michael
The overall guarantee including seed funding is $140k - I do not
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>recall
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>this high a number being advised previously. Could you clarify.
While I do not have any fundamental disagreement with the clauses
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>that
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>you have added at the end, they will need to be reviewed by
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>someone
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>more
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>legally qualified than me which may incur both costs and delay.
______
Steven
On 8 Mar 2016, at 16:43, Michael Terner <a href="mailto:mgt@appgeo.com" target="_blank"><mgt@appgeo.com></a> wrote:
Conference Dev Committee:
Thank you very much for your support of the motion to provide our
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>team
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>seed funding.
As promised earlier in the thread, attached is a "draft agreement"
between OSGeo and the Boston Location Organizing Committee
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>(BLOC), as
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>well
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>as with our PCO, Delaney Meeting & Event Management (DMEM). We are
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>hopeful
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>that this is on target and can be passed on to the Board in time
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>for
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>their
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>meeting on Thursday. We are assuming that Conference Dev will
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>bring
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>this to
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>the Board's attention.
Here's what you will find in the attached document (attached as
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>.DOC,
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>.ODT and .PDF):
Our re-work of the Bonn Template Agreement to include our specific
requests for advance and guarantees; as well as our "percentage of
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>profits
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>returned to OSGeo" language that was also contained in our
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>proposal
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>(and is
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>slightly different than 90%).
Some common-sense legal terms that were suggested by DMEM for
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>things
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>like
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>Force Majeur, mutual indemnification and arbitration of disputes.
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>We
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>also
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>affirm our commitment to purchase our own cancellation and
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>liability
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>insurance.
Attachment 1 which is structured as a PCO contract between OSGeo
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>and
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>DMEM
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>on behalf of the BLOC, allowing DMEM to serve as our financial
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>agent
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>and as
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>the entity that would sign the commitment with our venue (this was
distributed earlier).
Given the nature of this arrangement we have three signature
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>lines for
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>OSGeo, the BLOC, and also DMEM, on behalf of the BLOC.
Please let us know if you have any question, or need anything
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>further.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>And again, thanks in advance for carrying this forward to the
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>Board.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>Sincerely,
MT & the BLOC
This e-mail message and any attachments may contain confidential
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>or
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>legally privileged information. If you are not an intended
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>recipient
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>or
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>otherwise authorized to receive this message, you should not use,
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>copy,
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>distribute, disclose or take any action based on the information
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>contained
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>in this e-mail or any attachments. If you have received this
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>message
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>and
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>material in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>e-mail and
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>delete this message. Thank you on behalf of Applied Geographics,
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>Inc.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>(AppGeo).<OSGeo + BostonLOC Agreement DRAFT v3.odt><OSGeo +
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>BostonLOC
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>Agreement DRAFT v3.pdf><OSGeo + BostonLOC Agreement DRAFT
v3.doc>_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
<a href="mailto:Conference_dev@lists.osgeo.org" target="_blank">Conference_dev@lists.osgeo.org</a>
<a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev" target="_blank">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre>--
Michael Terner
Executive Vice President
617-447-2468 Direct | 617-447-2400 Main
Applied Geographics, Inc.
24 School Street, Suite 500
Boston, MA 02108
<a href="http://www.AppGeo.com" target="_blank">www.AppGeo.com</a>
Please come to Boston for Global FOSS4G 2017:
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre><a href="http://2017.foss4g.org/" target="_blank">http://2017.foss4g.org/</a>
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>This e-mail message and any attachments may contain confidential or
legally privileged information. If you are not an intended
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>recipient or
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>otherwise authorized to receive this message, you should not use,
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>copy,
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>distribute, disclose or take any action based on the information
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>contained
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>in this e-mail or any attachments. If you have received this
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>message
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>and
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>material in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>e-mail and
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>delete this message. Thank you on behalf of Applied Geographics,
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>Inc.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>(AppGeo).
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre>--
Michael Terner
Executive Vice President
617-447-2468 Direct | 617-447-2400 Main
Applied Geographics, Inc.
24 School Street, Suite 500
Boston, MA 02108
<a href="http://www.AppGeo.com" target="_blank">www.AppGeo.com</a>
Please come to Boston for Global FOSS4G 2017:
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre><a href="http://2017.foss4g.org/" target="_blank">http://2017.foss4g.org/</a>
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>This e-mail message and any attachments may contain confidential or
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre>legally
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>privileged information. If you are not an intended recipient or
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre>otherwise
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>authorized to receive this message, you should not use, copy,
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre>distribute,
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>disclose or take any action based on the information contained in
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>this
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>e-mail or any attachments. If you have received this message and
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre>material in
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre>delete
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>this
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>message. Thank you on behalf of Applied Geographics, Inc. (AppGeo).
_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
<a href="mailto:Conference_dev@lists.osgeo.org" target="_blank">Conference_dev@lists.osgeo.org</a>
<a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev" target="_blank">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre></pre>
</blockquote>
<pre></pre>
</blockquote>
<pre>
_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
<a href="mailto:Conference_dev@lists.osgeo.org" target="_blank">Conference_dev@lists.osgeo.org</a>
<a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev" target="_blank">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre>_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
<a href="mailto:Conference_dev@lists.osgeo.org" target="_blank">Conference_dev@lists.osgeo.org</a>
<a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev" target="_blank">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre>_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
<a href="mailto:Board@lists.osgeo.org" target="_blank">Board@lists.osgeo.org</a>
<a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board" target="_blank">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre>--
Yours sincerely,
ir. Dirk Frigne
CEO @geosparc
Geosparc n.v.
Brugsesteenweg 587
B-9030 Ghent
Tel: +32 9 236 60 18
GSM: +32 495 508 799
<a href="http://www.geomajas.org" target="_blank">http://www.geomajas.org</a>
<a href="http://www.geosparc.com" target="_blank">http://www.geosparc.com</a>
@DFrigne
<a href="http://be.linkedin.com/in/frigne" target="_blank">be.linkedin.com/in/frigne</a>
_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
<a href="mailto:Board@lists.osgeo.org" target="_blank">Board@lists.osgeo.org</a>
<a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board" target="_blank">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre>
</pre>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<br>
<pre>_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
<a href="mailto:Board@lists.osgeo.org" target="_blank">Board@lists.osgeo.org</a>
<a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board" target="_blank">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board</a></pre>
</div></div></blockquote>
<br>
</div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Board mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Board@lists.osgeo.org">Board@lists.osgeo.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board</a><br></blockquote></div><br></div></div>