[OSGeo-Conf] liability

Sanghee Shin shshin at gaia3d.com
Thu Jun 18 15:04:21 PDT 2015


Thanks for many people’s care about FOSS4G Seoul. I just would like to report current status of FOSS4G Seoul for your understanding. However I’m somewhat embarrassed why this suddenly emerged. 

As you know we have 2 major revenue sources. The first one is from sponsors the other is from attendees. 

For the sponsorship, Seoul team has gotten many sponsorships including several major sponsors and is still waiting for some late sponsorships which are almost confirmed. So we expect we may achieve our initial sponsorship target. 

In terms of number of attendees, we’re still not sure. After next Monday(22nd June) - deadline of early bird registration, we may be possible to estimate rough number. Here we have 2 worrying things. 1. We may have not many attendees from the same continent, Asia unlike FOSS4G in Europe and NA.  2. Outbreak of MERS in Korea could affect FOSS4G Seoul badly. Potential attendees especially from Asia are very worried about of MERS outbreak, it’s been slow-downed recently though. 

Regarding the loss responsibility, contract document between OSGeo and LOC doesn’t explicitly state the waiver of OSGeo. That just state the responsibility of LOC that LOC should pay back the same amount of  seed money even if the FOSS4G 2015 LOC record deficit. If you search this conf mailing list, you may find that request. 

The other things about FOSS4G Seoul are going well as planned. 

If all of you attend FOSS4G Seoul, everybody will be happy!! 


Sanghee Shin, Chair of FOSS4G 2015 Seoul 
"Toward Diversity! FOSS4G Bigbang from Seoul!"
Twitter: @foss4g
Facebook: FOSS4G2015
email: foss4gchair at osgeo.org

> 2015. 6. 18., 오후 4:29, Bart van den Eijnden <bartvde at osgis.nl> 작성:
> I fully agree.
> I think we should relief the financial stress from the Korea LOC.
> Of course given the theoretical case where an LOC would make a mess of things, we should not be liable ideally, but in the South-Korea case they are giving their full best and even more IMHO.
> Does anyone have background on why this was chosen before? I can’t recall the discussions.
> Best regards,
> Bart
>> On 18 Jun 2015, at 17:25, Darrell Fuhriman <darrell at garnix.org <mailto:darrell at garnix.org>> wrote:
>> That is, to be blunt, absurd.
>> If OSGeo is getting the benefits of any proceeds, they need to be assuming the liability as well.
>> d.
>>> On Jun 18, 2015, at 08:20, 신상희 <shshin at gaia3d.com <mailto:shshin at gaia3d.com>> wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>> Currently all liability will be upon Seoul LOC not OSGeo as per requested by conference committee. That's why Seoul team is so sensitive to funding and financial issues.
>>> Best,
>>> Sanghee

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/conference_dev/attachments/20150618/c74ef1ef/attachment.html>

More information about the Conference_dev mailing list