[OSGeo-Standards] Update on Proposal to accept OSGeo / OGC MOU

[Bruce Bannerman]

This is an update on where we are with the proposed OSGeo/OGC MOU.

The results of our list discussion on the proposed MOU was sent to the OSGeo Board. 

The OSGeo Board discussed the issue and notes are at [1]. We will need to discuss these issues raised by the OSGeo Board once we agree on the proposed MOU.

Members of the OSGeo/OGC MOU team subsequently discussed the more contentious aspects of the proposal regarding requesting OGC to extend their trademark fee license waiver to OSGeo Projects as per [2].

In Summary, Scott advised us that the OGC Planning Committee were NOT prepared to extend the Trademark License Fee waiver as it would have flow-on implications for all other Not For Profit entities that do pay Trademark License fees. 

Considering that the proposed OSGeo Associate Membership under the proposed MOU is a very welcome development and significant improvement over the current situation, the OSGeo/OGC MOU team are of the view that we can accept the proposed MOU as described at [3].

I will send a follow up email in the next few days to seek input from this list so that we can formalise this position.

Kind regards,

Bruce

[1] https://git.osgeo.org/gitea/osgeo/todo/issues/80#issuecomment-9799 <https://git.osgeo.org/gitea/osgeo/todo/issues/80#issuecomment-9799>

[2] https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/standards/2021-September/001277.html <https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/standards/2021-September/001277.html> 

[3] https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/MoU_OGC/Review_2020/Draft <https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/MoU_OGC/Review_2020/Draft>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20211027/ca8d4461/attachment.html>