[OSGeo-Discuss] "Hostile Takeover" -- what do we mean by this?

[Alex M]

On 08/28/2017 09:41 AM, Sara Safavi wrote:
> Hi discuss,
> 
> In the notification emails from CRO to new charter member nominees, the
> following is included (emphasis mine):
> 
> *"(Charter Members) have the following responsibilities: (1) annually vote
> for OSGeo Board Members; (2) annually vote for new OSGeo Charter Members
> and (3) be aware of and protect against a hostile takeover of OSGeo."*
> 
> I have had more than one nominee of mine contact me asking what exactly
> this means. I agree with their concerns: this is strange language to use,
> is not reflected in our bylaws, and frankly does not fit the image I
> presented when I first contacted them asking if they would accept a
> nomination.
> 
> It may be a language barrier or simply a misunderstanding, but can we
> clarify what is meant by using this kind of verbiage, and consider a
> re-wording?
> 
> Thanks,
> Sara
> 

The term comes from the the business world:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Takeover#Hostile

In the OSGeo context there was concern early on that OSGeo would be the
public puppet of a single company or entity. In particular if the
majority of board members worked for the same entity, or if a single
entity was a majority sponsor of the Foundation. From that perspective
the Charter members who elect the board need to pay attention to the
affiliations of who they elect to the board, and ensure the interests of
the foundation, and it's mission to protect it's member projects is the
top priority. Keep in mind that some projects have their Intellectual
Property 'owned' by OSGeo, which means in an extreme case the board
could re-license those projects to a non free and open source license.

I have no opinion on if and how to reword, or incorporate that more into
the the bylaws. As stated it's really a guidance/reminder to uphold the
original mission of the and maybe should be worded that way, with
hostile takeover as an example.

Thanks,
Alex