[OSGeo-Discuss] Board Proposal: Statement of OSGeo Legal Support

Wed Oct 31 10:36:13 PDT 2007

I have a contact at the Freedom Law Center. If no one here objects I
could send an e-mail inquiring about legal services or advice for the
OSGeo.

Landon

________________________________

From: discuss-bounces at lists.osgeo.org
[mailto:discuss-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of
Bruce.Bannerman at dpi.vic.gov.au
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 10:27 PM
To: OSGeo Discussions
Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Board Proposal: Statement of OSGeo Legal
Support

IMO 

Good call Cameron. 

In this day and age it would pay to be proactive on these types of
issues. 

It's been a while since I last looked at this. 

>From memory, a number of large companies have pledged resources to help
defend FOSS. I'm not sure where this is at currently. 

I think that its with the Linux Foundation -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Linux_Foundation (formed in 2007 from
The Open Source Development Labs and the Free Standards Group). 

You may also want to look at the Software Freedom Law Centre founded by
Eben Moglen. I understand that they provide pro-bono legal services to
protect and advance Free and Open Source Software: 

http://www.softwarefreedom.org/technology/ 

Bruce 

Cameron Shorter <cameron.shorter at gmail.com> 
Sent by: discuss-bounces at lists.osgeo.org 

31/10/07 09:30 AM 

Please respond to
OSGeo Discussions <discuss at lists.osgeo.org>

To

OSGeo Discussions <discuss at lists.osgeo.org> 

cc

Subject

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Board Proposal: Statement of OSGeo Legal Support

Good processes + no money is an acceptable strategy so long as we have 
consciously made this decision and everyone is aware of the strategy.

Allan Doyle wrote:
>
> On Oct 30, 2007, at 15:09 , Michael P. Gerlek wrote:
>
>> Way back on that cold day in Chicago, I'm not sure anyone ever really
>> thought about what it would mean when we said we'd "offer legal
>> protection".
>>
>> Does it imply/lead-to/entail some sort of indemnification?  Ouch,
that
>> would be pricey...  How does the Apache gang, et al, handle this?
>
> My recollection is that the Apache gang carefully keeps their coffers 
> empty and makes sure the code all legally belongs to the Apache 
> Foundation. Thus there's not enough of a pot of gold to win in a suit.
>
> However, I'm guessing that this strategy depends on a pretty 
> well-defined process to ensure there are no loopholes.
>
>     Allan
>
>>
>>
>> -mpg
>>
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: discuss-bounces at lists.osgeo.org
>>> [mailto:discuss-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Landon Blake
>>> Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 7:56 AM
>>> To: OSGeo Discussions
>>> Subject: RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] Board Proposal: Statement of
>>> OSGeo Legal Support
>>>
>>> Cameron,
>>>
>>> I think this is an excellent idea, and a lawyer should definitely be
>>> consulted. I wonder if the legal staff at the Software Freedom
>>> Conservancy could assist.
>>>
>>> Landon
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: discuss-bounces at lists.osgeo.org
>>> [mailto:discuss-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Cameron
Shorter
>>> Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 3:56 AM
>>> To: OSGeo-Board
>>> Cc: OSGeo Discussions; Adrian Custer
>>> Subject: [OSGeo-Discuss] Board Proposal: Statement of OSGeo Legal
>>> Support
>>>
>>> OSGeo Board, (CC to OSGeo Discuss),
>>>
>>> During the founding of OSGeo, it was often noted that OSGeo projects
>>> would benefit from OSGeo legal protection. Now, as Geotools wrestles
>>> with graduation criteria and how to handle license assignment, the
>>> nature and level of legal protection offered by OSGeo is
>>> unclear. Also
>>> unclear is the level of legal review available (as tested by
Geotools
>>> crafting of a Copywrite Assignment document).
>>> Consequently, geotools is having difficulty deciding whether
>>> it is wise
>>> to assign copywrite to OSGeo.
>>>
>>> I suspect a large part of the problem is that board members (like
>>> myself) are not lawyers and don't have a clear understanding of the
>>> options, the value of each of the options to OSGeo and the
>>> projects (how
>>> much protection is given), and the cost both in time and
financially.
>>> Key questions to answer for each option are:
>>> * What level of support is given to contributors and license
reviewers
>>> (individuals and companies)
>>> * What level of support is given to OSGeo users?
>>> * What level of support is given to projects? Will OSGeo
>>> fight a license
>>> infringer on behalf of a project?
>>> * What level of support is given to the OSGeo Foundation?
>>>
>>> *Proposal*
>>> That the board makes a clear statement on their website about
>>> nature and
>>> level of support offered by OSGeo to OSGeo projects and Individuals.
>>> This statement needs to be backed up with a budget item addressing
>>> financial implications related to the statement.
>>>
>>> Implementation:
>>> I suggest the steps to achieve the above would be:
>>> 1. Board approves budget to have a lawyer, or volunteer with legal
>>> review, to draw up a list of options and their financial
>>> implications.
>>> Adrian Custer's review provides an excellent basis for a
>>> lawyer to start
>>>
>>> from.
http://docs.codehaus.org/display/GEOTOOLS/Geotools+Legal+Review
>>> 2. Board votes to select best option.
>>> 3. OSGeo financial sponsors are given opportunity to contribute to
>>> decision.
>>> 4. OSGeo budgets for decision
>>> 5. OSGeo records the legal stance publicly (on a webpage).
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Cameron Shorter
>>> Geospatial Systems Architect
>>> Tel: +61 (0)2 8570 5050
>>> Mob: +61 (0)419 142 254
>>>
>>> Think Globally, Fix Locally
>>> Commercial Support for Geospatial Open Source Software
>>> http://www.lisasoft.com/LISAsoft/SupportedProducts.html
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Discuss mailing list
>>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>>
>>>
>>> Warning:
>>> Information provided via electronic media is not guaranteed
>>> against defects including translation and transmission
>>> errors. If the reader is not the intended recipient, you are
>>> hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or
>>> copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you
>>> have received this information in error, please notify the
>>> sender immediately.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Discuss mailing list
>>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss mailing list
>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>

-- 
Cameron Shorter
Geospatial Systems Architect
Tel: +61 (0)2 8570 5050
Mob: +61 (0)419 142 254

Think Globally, Fix Locally
Commercial Support for Geospatial Open Source Software
http://www.lisasoft.com/LISAsoft/SupportedProducts.html

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Notice:
This email and any attachments may contain information that is personal,
confidential,
legally privileged and/or copyright. No part of it should be reproduced,
adapted or communicated without the prior written consent of the
copyright owner. 

It is the responsibility of the recipient to check for and remove
viruses.

If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender by
return email, delete it from your system and destroy any copies. You are
not authorised to use, communicate or rely on the information contained
in this email.

Please consider the environment before printing this email.

Warning:
Information provided via electronic media is not guaranteed against defects including translation and transmission errors. If the reader is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this information in error, please notify the sender immediately.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20071031/caf48791/attachment-0002.html>