As an information

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
12 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

As an information

Michael Bimmler
Just to inform you:
There is at the moment quite some talking going on at
http://ch.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bylaws/En  about bylaws (reaction
from ChapCom and the Legal Counsel of WMF)

--
Regards
Michael Bimmler
_______________________________________________
Wikimediach-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediach-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: As an information

Delphine Ménard
On 4/3/06, Michael Bimmler <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Just to inform you:
> There is at the moment quite some talking going on at
> http://ch.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bylaws/En  about bylaws (reaction
> from ChapCom and the Legal Counsel of WMF)


I think all is resolved. Thank you for translating the part that we
changed [1] into the other languages so that it is repercuted in the
official translations of the bylaws.

Please inform us when this is done at chaptercommittee-l AT wikimedia
PUNTO org so that we can give our advice to the board and finally be
done with it.

[1]
The Association shares the objectives of the Wikimedia Foundation,
Inc., a not-for-profit organisation based in Florida, USA. The
Wikimedia Foundation coordinates activities along the lines of the
Association's purpose within the international sector, and manages the
name Wikimedia as well as the names of the various international
Wikimedia projects.


Delphine
--
~notafish
_______________________________________________
Wikimediach-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediach-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: As an information

Frédéric Schütz
Delphine Ménard wrote:

> I think all is resolved. Thank you for translating the part that we
> changed [1] into the other languages so that it is repercuted in the
> official translations of the bylaws.

I have updated the English version of the bylaws already.

> Please inform us when this is done at chaptercommittee-l AT wikimedia
> PUNTO org so that we can give our advice to the board and finally be
> done with it.

I will try to finish the French translation ASAP.

Frédéric
_______________________________________________
Wikimediach-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediach-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: As an information

Jürg Wolf
In reply to this post by Delphine Ménard
Hi

Just some questions about something, that maybe is discussed before, while
defining this section:

* While Wikimedia CH _SHARES_ the objectives of the Wikimedia Foundation _FULLY_
(not only in parts), do we have the right to discuss and form these objectives
actively or do we have to take whatever the Foundation decides, including a
total change of goals and as a extreme a total commerzialisation?

* If the Foundation decides something like this and the Swiss Chapter does not
share this objective, what options do we have then?

* Ist this wording a MUST if we want to be a Chapter of Wikimedia or can we opt
out in some subjects?

* If we have a different point of view than the Foundation, the wording says,
that we have nearly no rights to oppose against these subjects, because we HAVE
TO SHARE the objectives of the Foundation. My fear is, that we would become a
simple puppet of the foundation (nothing against it by now!) instead of a
self-contained association.

* As a possible szenario (just in my mind by now - but not in reach), our
association also want to support other software than the Wikimedia software,
what the Foundation could stop by this wording. And we have no chance to do
something against this directive.

I know, these questions can only be asked by a person out of a direct democratic
structure, but as I read the posting, those thoughts rose in my mind.

Jürg Wolf

--
Zitat von Delphine Ménard <[hidden email]>:

> On 4/3/06, Michael Bimmler <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Just to inform you:
> > There is at the moment quite some talking going on at
> > http://ch.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bylaws/En  about bylaws (reaction
> > from ChapCom and the Legal Counsel of WMF)
>
>
> I think all is resolved. Thank you for translating the part that we
> changed [1] into the other languages so that it is repercuted in the
> official translations of the bylaws.
>
> Please inform us when this is done at chaptercommittee-l AT wikimedia
> PUNTO org so that we can give our advice to the board and finally be
> done with it.
>
> [1]
> The Association shares the objectives of the Wikimedia Foundation,
> Inc., a not-for-profit organisation based in Florida, USA. The
> Wikimedia Foundation coordinates activities along the lines of the
> Association's purpose within the international sector, and manages the
> name Wikimedia as well as the names of the various international
> Wikimedia projects.
>
>
> Delphine
> --
> ~notafish
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimediach-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediach-l

_______________________________________________
Wikimediach-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediach-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: As an information

Frédéric Schütz
Jürg Wolf wrote:

> * While Wikimedia CH _SHARES_ the objectives of the Wikimedia Foundation _FULLY_
> (not only in parts), do we have the right to discuss and form these objectives
> actively or do we have to take whatever the Foundation decides, including a
> total change of goals and as a extreme a total commerzialisation?
[...]
> I know, these questions can only be asked by a person out of a direct democratic
> structure, but as I read the posting, those thoughts rose in my mind.

Yep, fair enough...

The goals of Wikimedia CH are indicated at §2.1 -- these are the
official goals, as defined by the bylaws. §2.3 is here to indicate that
there is some kind of link with the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF), which is
  obviously required since we share their name, but it does not
influence by itself the goals as defined earlier.

As I understand it, the word "share" is only informational, meaning:
"look, these are our goals, and the reason why we have chosen to pursue
these particular goals is because the WMF is doing this and that and we
like it". I don't think there is any legal possibility by which an
association could peg its goals to another entity, and have them change
any day without the members even knowing about the change -- no way.

Frédéric
_______________________________________________
Wikimediach-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediach-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: As an information

Ilario Valdelli
In reply to this post by Frédéric Schütz
I've modified the italian translation. In any case I'm reading the
questions made by Jürg: these are also my questions.

Ilario

On 4/5/06, Frederic Schutz <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Delphine Ménard wrote:
>
> > I think all is resolved. Thank you for translating the part that we
> > changed [1] into the other languages so that it is repercuted in the
> > official translations of the bylaws.
>
> I have updated the English version of the bylaws already.
>
> > Please inform us when this is done at chaptercommittee-l AT wikimedia
> > PUNTO org so that we can give our advice to the board and finally be
> > done with it.
>
> I will try to finish the French translation ASAP.
>
> Frédéric
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimediach-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediach-l
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimediach-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediach-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: As an information

Ilario Valdelli
In reply to this post by Jürg Wolf
The questions of Jürg are correct. The text is changed like this:

"The Association shares the objectives of the Wikimedia Foundation,
Inc., a not-for-profit organisation based in Florida, USA."

before it was:

"The Association shall take the responsiblities of a section (Local
Chapter) of the Wikimedia Foundation Inc. (Florida, USA). The
Association's independence is not affected by this. The Wikimedia
Foundation acts as the umbrella organization for all national
Wikimedia sections."

The last sentence is the same: "The Wikimedia Foundation coordinates
the activities according to the Association's purpose within the
international sector and it manages the name Wikimedia as well as the
names of the various international Wikimedia projects."

All problem is to understand the verb "share". The previous sentence
was more clear, the new version is vague. In the new version we don't
analyze the meaning of this word. It should be "to divide in equal
parts" or "to partecipate with". The problem is: who decides?
Wikimedia Foundation decides and we should receive its guidelines? or,
like Jürg says, we couldn't share the objectives?

It's important to define this point to haven't problems later.

Ilario

On 4/5/06, Jürg Wolf <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi
>
> Just some questions about something, that maybe is discussed before, while
> defining this section:
>
> * While Wikimedia CH _SHARES_ the objectives of the Wikimedia Foundation _FULLY_
> (not only in parts), do we have the right to discuss and form these objectives
> actively or do we have to take whatever the Foundation decides, including a
> total change of goals and as a extreme a total commerzialisation?
>
> * If the Foundation decides something like this and the Swiss Chapter does not
> share this objective, what options do we have then?
>
> * Ist this wording a MUST if we want to be a Chapter of Wikimedia or can we opt
> out in some subjects?
>
> * If we have a different point of view than the Foundation, the wording says,
> that we have nearly no rights to oppose against these subjects, because we HAVE
> TO SHARE the objectives of the Foundation. My fear is, that we would become a
> simple puppet of the foundation (nothing against it by now!) instead of a
> self-contained association.
>
> * As a possible szenario (just in my mind by now - but not in reach), our
> association also want to support other software than the Wikimedia software,
> what the Foundation could stop by this wording. And we have no chance to do
> something against this directive.
>
> I know, these questions can only be asked by a person out of a direct democratic
> structure, but as I read the posting, those thoughts rose in my mind.
>
> Jürg Wolf
>
> --
> Zitat von Delphine Ménard <[hidden email]>:
>
> > On 4/3/06, Michael Bimmler <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > Just to inform you:
> > > There is at the moment quite some talking going on at
> > > http://ch.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bylaws/En  about bylaws (reaction
> > > from ChapCom and the Legal Counsel of WMF)
> >
> >
> > I think all is resolved. Thank you for translating the part that we
> > changed [1] into the other languages so that it is repercuted in the
> > official translations of the bylaws.
> >
> > Please inform us when this is done at chaptercommittee-l AT wikimedia
> > PUNTO org so that we can give our advice to the board and finally be
> > done with it.
> >
> > [1]
> > The Association shares the objectives of the Wikimedia Foundation,
> > Inc., a not-for-profit organisation based in Florida, USA. The
> > Wikimedia Foundation coordinates activities along the lines of the
> > Association's purpose within the international sector, and manages the
> > name Wikimedia as well as the names of the various international
> > Wikimedia projects.
> >
> >
> > Delphine
> > --
> > ~notafish
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimediach-l mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediach-l
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimediach-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediach-l
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimediach-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediach-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: As an information

Ilario Valdelli
In reply to this post by Frédéric Schütz
>
> The goals of Wikimedia CH are indicated at §2.1 -- these are the
> official goals, as defined by the bylaws. §2.3 is here to indicate that
> there is some kind of link with the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF), which is
>   obviously required since we share their name, but it does not
> influence by itself the goals as defined earlier.

You are in the right, our goal is: "...to support the creation,
collection and distribution of Open Content in a not-for-profit way in
order to support education and the equal opportunity of access to
knowledge."

If the foundation took a decision that we do not share (respecting our
goal), we could refuse it following point 2,1 or must accept it
following point 2.2?

>
> As I understand it, the word "share" is only informational, meaning:
> "look, these are our goals, and the reason why we have chosen to pursue
> these particular goals is because the WMF is doing this and that and we
> like it". I don't think there is any legal possibility by which an
> association could peg its goals to another entity, and have them change
> any day without the members even knowing about the change -- no way.
>

The Bylaws should be not ambiguous. I suggest to define better the
word "share" in point 2.2 adding another sentence more careful.

Ilario
_______________________________________________
Wikimediach-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediach-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: As an information

Frédéric Schütz
Ilario Valdelli wrote:

> The Bylaws should be not ambiguous. I suggest to define better the
> word "share" in point 2.2 adding another sentence more careful.

I am not against a clarification. We could indicate that the Wikimedia
CH "shares the objectives of WMF, as they are defined at the time of
creation of the Association" (which would require us to doublecheck the
exact content of these objectives during the foundation meeting), making
sure that we are not bound by any subsequent modification ?

Cheers,

Frederic
_______________________________________________
Wikimediach-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediach-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: As an information

Delphine Ménard
On 4/5/06, Frederic Schutz <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Ilario Valdelli wrote:
>
> > The Bylaws should be not ambiguous. I suggest to define better the
> > word "share" in point 2.2 adding another sentence more careful.
>
> I am not against a clarification. We could indicate that the Wikimedia
> CH "shares the objectives of WMF, as they are defined at the time of
> creation of the Association" (which would require us to doublecheck the
> exact content of these objectives during the foundation meeting), making
> sure that we are not bound by any subsequent modification ?

OK, I think we're splitting hairs here. ;-)

First the English "share" really means that Wikimedia CH and Wikimedia
Foundation have *the same kind of objectives*. You share someone's
philosophy, you share someone's ideas, you share someone's goals. It
doesn't mean you have *the exact same* ideas, objectives and
philosophy.


Let's try to put this in situation:

*If* the Foundation went crazy and decided to sell chocolate to make
lots of money out of it instead of working on open content, this
sentence does *not* tie Wikimedia CH to the Foundation's craziness.

This said, *if* the Foundation decided to go into chocolate business,
it would still be the Wikimedia Foundation, thus holding the name
Wikimedia and *you* probably wouldn't want to be called Wikimedia
anymore, so you'd rename the association and start over under the name
"Association for real open content that will not turn into a chocolate
business", for example.

More over, these are your bylaws, a contract between the members and
for future members  of the association and not a contract with the
Foundation, so there is *nothing* the Foundation can do that would
make you go against your goals.

So please, don't read more into this sentence than there really is.
The idea is to be able to drop in the bylaws the fact that the
trademarks are with the Foundation (and that is just the reality).

I find the sentence says exactly what it says, ie. "Wikimedia CH and
the Wikimedia Foundation are working in the same kind of environment".
We're talking about the big picture here.

My two chocolate squares.

Delphine
--
~notafish
_______________________________________________
Wikimediach-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediach-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: As an information

Michael Bimmler
Just to say: I entirely agree with Delphine's comments here and I have
also quickly done the changes in the german version (can still be
amended). I don't want to override anybody's questions but I think we
can somehow close the discussion here as Delphine assured us that we
would not need to overtake "stupid new aims of the foundation".
>From my point of view it would be fine if ChapCom could now state a
recommendation towards WMF board (and then we'll hope that it won't
take too long for the board to vote on it).
Regards
Michael
_______________________________________________
Wikimediach-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediach-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: As an information

Ilario Valdelli
In reply to this post by Delphine Ménard

> *If* the Foundation went crazy and decided to sell chocolate to make
> lots of money out of it instead of working on open content, this
> sentence does *not* tie Wikimedia CH to the Foundation's craziness.
>
>  
It could be interesting. We can "share" (surely) in this situation the
same goals of Foundation. Swiss chocolate tastes good ;)

Is the Foundation also interested to sell watches?

The raised problem in my opinion was a problem of Foundation (to have
clear relations among new Wikimedias), but if Foundation thinks that
there is not problem, Wikimedia CH has no problem (at least for me).

I've understood in this way the request to change the sentence borrowed
from Wikimedia DE. I made a mistake :(

Greetings

Ilario
_______________________________________________
Wikimediach-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediach-l