[Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's non-disclosure agreement

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
61 messages Options
1234
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's non-disclosure agreement

MZMcBride-2
Hi.

As I understand it, many Wikimedia Foundation employees are required to
sign a non-disclosure agreement (NDA). Is there a copy of the current
version of this non-disclosure agreement anywhere? I briefly checked
Meta-Wiki and wikimediafoundation.org, but didn't see anything off-hand.

(I did come across other interesting and somewhat related pages such as
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Statement>, though.)

MZMcBride



_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's non-disclosure agreement

Benoit Landry
Hi,

This is the Wikimedia UK version:
http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Non_Disclosure_Agreement

Also relevant may be this discussion:
http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Water_cooler/2012#Comparison_of_UK_NDA_with_WMF_NDA

~~~~, Salvidrim

-----Original Message-----
From: MZMcBride
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 8:21 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's non-disclosure agreement

Hi.

As I understand it, many Wikimedia Foundation employees are required to
sign a non-disclosure agreement (NDA). Is there a copy of the current
version of this non-disclosure agreement anywhere? I briefly checked
Meta-Wiki and wikimediafoundation.org, but didn't see anything off-hand.

(I did come across other interesting and somewhat related pages such as
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Statement>, though.)

MZMcBride



_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l 


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's non-disclosure agreement

MZMcBride-2
Salvidrim wrote:
>This is the Wikimedia UK version:
>http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Non_Disclosure_Agreement
>
>Also relevant may be this discussion:
>http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Water_cooler/2012#Comparison_of_UK_NDA_with_W
>MF_NDA

Thanks for the links. :-)  I started an index page at
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Non-disclosure_agreements>.

MZMcBride



_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's non-disclosure agreement

MZMcBride-2
In reply to this post by MZMcBride-2
MZMcBride wrote:
>As I understand it, many Wikimedia Foundation employees are required to
>sign a non-disclosure agreement (NDA). Is there a copy of the current
>version of this non-disclosure agreement anywhere? I briefly checked
>Meta-Wiki and wikimediafoundation.org, but didn't see anything off-hand.

I'm still looking for a copy of the Wikimedia Foundation's non-disclosure
agreement. Does anyone know who might be able to provide a copy for
Meta-Wiki? There's a very sad index of Wikimedia-related NDAs here:
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/NDA>.

MZMcBride



_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's non-disclosure agreement

Mono mium
I think it's necessary for the Foundation to both provide a copy and
explain the necessity of the NDA for transparency and legal/ethical
reasons, especially if they are asking volunteers to sign them.


On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 3:40 PM, MZMcBride <[hidden email]> wrote:

> MZMcBride wrote:
> >As I understand it, many Wikimedia Foundation employees are required to
> >sign a non-disclosure agreement (NDA). Is there a copy of the current
> >version of this non-disclosure agreement anywhere? I briefly checked
> >Meta-Wiki and wikimediafoundation.org, but didn't see anything off-hand.
>
> I'm still looking for a copy of the Wikimedia Foundation's non-disclosure
> agreement. Does anyone know who might be able to provide a copy for
> Meta-Wiki? There's a very sad index of Wikimedia-related NDAs here:
> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/NDA>.
>
> MZMcBride
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's non-disclosure agreement

MZMcBride-2
Mono wrote:
>I think it's necessary for the Foundation to both provide a copy and
>explain the necessity of the NDA for transparency and legal/ethical
>reasons, especially if they are asking volunteers to sign them.

Hmm, not just asking, but apparently requiring certain volunteers to sign
them. It's unclear which volunteers are and are not exempt from this
requirement. For example, it seems that Bugzilla administrators are now
required to have signed an NDA, but OTRS volunteers and wiki
administrators are not. Wikimedia stewards... it's unclear, as it is for
many other user volunteer groups (people with access to rt.wikimedia.org,
shell users, et al.).

I suppose we should begin to expand the page on Meta-Wiki. Cunningham's
Law will kick in, as necessary.

MZMcBride



_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's non-disclosure agreement

metasj
I have not seen a copy of such NDAs myself.   Where did you see that
Bugzilla admins have to sign an NDA?

As far as I know the relevant issue is that anyone who has access to
private personal information of users needs to sign an agreement that
they will not share that information.

Whatever people are signing, it makes sense for the agreements
themselves to be public.

SJ

On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 6:21 PM, MZMcBride <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Mono wrote:
>>I think it's necessary for the Foundation to both provide a copy and
>>explain the necessity of the NDA for transparency and legal/ethical
>>reasons, especially if they are asking volunteers to sign them.
>
> Hmm, not just asking, but apparently requiring certain volunteers to sign
> them. It's unclear which volunteers are and are not exempt from this
> requirement. For example, it seems that Bugzilla administrators are now
> required to have signed an NDA, but OTRS volunteers and wiki
> administrators are not. Wikimedia stewards... it's unclear, as it is for
> many other user volunteer groups (people with access to rt.wikimedia.org,
> shell users, et al.).
>
> I suppose we should begin to expand the page on Meta-Wiki. Cunningham's
> Law will kick in, as necessary.
>
> MZMcBride
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l



--
Samuel Klein          @metasj           w:user:sj          +1 617 529 4266

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's non-disclosure agreement

MZMcBride-2
Samuel Klein wrote:
>I have not seen a copy of such NDAs myself.   Where did you see that
>Bugzilla admins have to sign an NDA?

Philippe B. said so, I'm told. As it happens, most Bugzilla admins are
Wikimedia Foundation staff, so the issue doesn't seem to come up much.

>As far as I know the relevant issue is that anyone who has access to
>private personal information of users needs to sign an agreement that
>they will not share that information.

This definition doesn't seem to include CheckUsers, oversighters, OTRS
volunteers and OTRS administrators, wiki administrators, and many others,
so I'm not sure it's accurate.

It's unclear whether Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees members and
Wikimedia stewards are also required to sign NDAs. It seems all Wikimedia
Foundation employees are required to sign one.

And I imagine there are other (volunteer) user groups I'm forgetting.

>Whatever people are signing, it makes sense for the agreements
>themselves to be public.

Agreed. :-)  Any idea who I could poke about that? I e-mailed this list in
January 2013 with no real response.

Relatedly, the Wikimedia Foundation's employee handbook was posted to
wikimediafoundation.org in December 2012, but it was subsequently deleted
without explanation: <https://wikimedia.org/wiki/Employee_Handbook> and
<https://wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Smerrick#Employee_Handbook>. I'm not
totally sure this level of transparency is exactly needed, per se, but it
was an interesting read and it may serve as a reference point for other
non-profits and similar organizations. It'd be nice to see it re-posted at
some point.

MZMcBride



_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's non-disclosure agreement

Fæ
On 6 March 2013 07:11, MZMcBride <[hidden email]> wrote:
> It's unclear whether Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees members and
> Wikimedia stewards are also required to sign NDAs. It seems all Wikimedia
> Foundation employees are required to sign one.

Staff contracts should effectively do this, though one might need to
add NDAs for temporary contractors and consultants.

(A personal statement, off the top of my head and without doing any
research...) trustees should not be asked to sign a NDA as they should
be free to act with their conscience for the long term benefit of the
charity, which may include being free to publicly discuss negative
material; hard to do if every email and document is covered by a NDA.
Plus one expects trustees to have liability insurance, so unless there
is gross misconduct, such a contract would never be enforceable if the
trustee can claim to be acting within their role as a trustee (i.e.
any civil claim for damages would effectively be the charity acting
against itself).

Wikimedia UK has a Trustee Code of Conduct, which ensures that
trustees do not go "off the rails", and sets the behavioural
expectations for prospective trustees rather nicely.[1] As well as a
list of NDAs, it would be good to have an index of similar governance
related codes (Trustee CoC, COI policies,[2] Financial reporting
standards, et al).

Links
1. https://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Trustee_Code_of_Conduct
2. https://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Conflict_of_Interest_Policy,
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Conflict_of_interest_policy

Cheers,
Fae
--
Ashley Van Haeften (Fae) [hidden email]
Chapters Association Council Chair http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WCA
Guide to email tags: http://j.mp/mfae

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's non-disclosure agreement

K. Peachey-2
In reply to this post by MZMcBride-2
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 5:11 PM, MZMcBride <[hidden email]> wrote:
> ...
>>As far as I know the relevant issue is that anyone who has access to
>>private personal information of users needs to sign an agreement that
>>they will not share that information.
>
> This definition doesn't seem to include CheckUsers, oversighters, OTRS
> volunteers and OTRS administrators, wiki administrators, and many others,
> so I'm not sure it's accurate.

(OTRS Wise) That may be a historical thing and queue dependant, I know
the gentlemen from OTRS (Martin?) had to sign one before he could
start work on updating the foundation's install

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's non-disclosure agreement

Benjamin Chen
In reply to this post by MZMcBride-2



On 6 Mar, 2013, at 3:11 PM, MZMcBride <[hidden email]> wrote:

> It's unclear whether Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees members and
> Wikimedia stewards are also required to sign NDAs.


Just for the purpose of information, stewards do not sign NDAs.

Regards,

Benjamin Chen / [[User:Bencmq]]

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's non-disclosure agreement

MZMcBride-2
Benjamin Chen wrote:
>On 6 Mar, 2013, at 3:11 PM, MZMcBride <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> It's unclear whether Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees members and
>> Wikimedia stewards are also required to sign NDAs.
>
>Just for the purpose of information, stewards do not sign NDAs.

Thanks! I've updated <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/NDA> accordingly.

MZMcBride



_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's non-disclosure agreement

Brandon Harris-4

        I haven't seen the NDA, and I don't know if it's actually required or not, but Bugzilla admins would have access to the security queue, which would be something that necessitates non-disclosure.

---
Brandon Harris, Senior Designer, Wikimedia Foundation

Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's non-disclosure agreement

Sarah Stierch-2
In reply to this post by K. Peachey-2
Just a quick note - while I was a fellow, I don't remember signing a
NDA. I think people who did surveys had to (researchers, staff members,
whatever) depending on the type of information they'd be gathering from
people. Or, of course, the type of database you'd be given access too
(i.e. it makes sense that maybe someone from analytics or grantmaking
<depending on the role> would have to sign an NDA versus someone from
the education program).

Most organizations don't walk around releasing their NDA's. In fact, I
don't know a single organization that would engage people to do so. And
even though WMF is WMF, I don't think it's bad for it to hold onto some
professional practices like that. It's common practice, in the States,
for non and for profits to do. I always thought it was funny that NDA's
existed at WMF just because of the openness, but, at the same time, it's
industry standard and doesn't phase me. People should be glad WMF has one.

-Sarah

On 3/5/13 11:34 PM, K. Peachey wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 5:11 PM, MZMcBride <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> ...
>>> As far as I know the relevant issue is that anyone who has access to
>>> private personal information of users needs to sign an agreement that
>>> they will not share that information.
>> This definition doesn't seem to include CheckUsers, oversighters, OTRS
>> volunteers and OTRS administrators, wiki administrators, and many others,
>> so I'm not sure it's accurate.
> (OTRS Wise) That may be a historical thing and queue dependant, I know
> the gentlemen from OTRS (Martin?) had to sign one before he could
> start work on updating the foundation's install
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


--
*Sarah Stierch*
*/Museumist and open culture advocate/*
 >>Visit sarahstierch.com <http://sarahstierch.com><<
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's non-disclosure agreement

Deryck Chan-2
As far as I know, NDAs are primarily for protecting people's privacy. I
signed a WMF NDA because I'll be reviewing Wikimania scholarships, and I'll
see the real names and nationalities etc of many Wikimedia volunteers who
attend Wikimania but still try to keep their RL identity separate from
their Wikimedia usernames.
On Mar 6, 2013 4:43 PM, "Sarah Stierch" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Just a quick note - while I was a fellow, I don't remember signing a NDA.
> I think people who did surveys had to (researchers, staff members,
> whatever) depending on the type of information they'd be gathering from
> people. Or, of course, the type of database you'd be given access too (i.e.
> it makes sense that maybe someone from analytics or grantmaking <depending
> on the role> would have to sign an NDA versus someone from the education
> program).
>
> Most organizations don't walk around releasing their NDA's. In fact, I
> don't know a single organization that would engage people to do so. And
> even though WMF is WMF, I don't think it's bad for it to hold onto some
> professional practices like that. It's common practice, in the States, for
> non and for profits to do. I always thought it was funny that NDA's existed
> at WMF just because of the openness, but, at the same time, it's industry
> standard and doesn't phase me. People should be glad WMF has one.
>
> -Sarah
>
> On 3/5/13 11:34 PM, K. Peachey wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 5:11 PM, MZMcBride <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>>> As far as I know the relevant issue is that anyone who has access to
>>>> private personal information of users needs to sign an agreement that
>>>> they will not share that information.
>>>>
>>> This definition doesn't seem to include CheckUsers, oversighters, OTRS
>>> volunteers and OTRS administrators, wiki administrators, and many others,
>>> so I'm not sure it's accurate.
>>>
>> (OTRS Wise) That may be a historical thing and queue dependant, I know
>> the gentlemen from OTRS (Martin?) had to sign one before he could
>> start work on updating the foundation's install
>>
>> ______________________________**_________________
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list
>> [hidden email].**org <[hidden email]>
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l<https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l>
>>
>
>
> --
> *Sarah Stierch*
> */Museumist and open culture advocate/*
> >>Visit sarahstierch.com <http://sarahstierch.com><<
> ______________________________**_________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email].**org <[hidden email]>
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l<https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's non-disclosure agreement

Keegan Peterzell
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 10:48 AM, Deryck Chan <[hidden email]>wrote:

> As far as I know, NDAs are primarily for protecting people's privacy.


That's my understanding as well.  I have a NDA with the WMF as a volunteer
from a couple years ago to help with fundraising after I no longer
contracted for the foundation in order to access the donations CRM.
 Frankly, I don't know if I can even log into that anymore...l

--
~Keegan

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's non-disclosure agreement

Keegan Peterzell
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 3:10 PM, Keegan Peterzell <[hidden email]>wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 10:48 AM, Deryck Chan <[hidden email]>wrote:
>
>> As far as I know, NDAs are primarily for protecting people's privacy.
>
>
> That's my understanding as well.  I have a NDA with the WMF as a volunteer
> from a couple years ago to help with fundraising after I no longer
> contracted for the foundation in order to access the donations CRM.
>  Frankly, I don't know if I can even log into that anymore...l
>
> --
> ~Keegan
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan


Ignore the I.  End message.

--
~Keegan

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's non-disclosure agreement

Tomasz W. Kozłowski
On 6 March 2013 22:11, Keegan wrote:

> That's my understanding as well.  I have a NDA with the WMF as a volunteer
> from a couple years ago to help with fundraising after I no longer
> contracted for the foundation in order to access the donations CRM.
>  Frankly, I don't know if I can even log into that anymore...l

Well, I believe it is pretty obvious that one has to sign an NDA when
dealing with such information as that available from donors; the donor
policy <https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donor_policy/en> mentions
names, addresses and phone numbers of our donors as well as "data
visible on the checkques", so I guess it's pretty serious.

I agree that one of the reasons for the existence of NDAs is to
protect people's privacy, especially when one has access to such
databases as the fundraising one; however, I can't see why a Bugzilla
administrator would be required to sign an NDA -- is there anything
secret when it comes to bugs in a GPL-licenced software? Or maybe
there is a different reason for signing the NDA? Perhaps the admins
can access some sensitive data other than IP addresses, etc., which
volunteer checkusers and oversighters also have access to, without the
need to sign anything?

And just by the way (I think Sarah mentioned that): you just need to
Google for "non-disclosure agreement" to find examples of
organisations publicly sharing their NDAs--since it is no secret what
is usually covered by such documents, why would the WMF not publish
their NDA?

--
Tomasz W. Kozłowski
a.k.a. [[user:odder]]

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's non-disclosure agreement

Tomasz W. Kozłowski
In reply to this post by Keegan Peterzell
On 6 March 2013 22:11, Keegan wrote:

> That's my understanding as well.  I have a NDA with the WMF as a volunteer
> from a couple years ago to help with fundraising after I no longer
> contracted for the foundation in order to access the donations CRM.
>  Frankly, I don't know if I can even log into that anymore...l

Well, I believe it is pretty obvious that one has to sign an NDA when
dealing with such information as that available from donors; the donor
policy <https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donor_policy/en> mentions
names, addresses and phone numbers of our donors as well as "data
visible on the checkques", so I guess it's pretty serious.

I agree that one of the reasons for the existence of NDAs is to
protect people's privacy, especially when one has access to such
databases as the fundraising one; however, I can't see why a Bugzilla
administrator would be required to sign an NDA -- is there anything
secret when it comes to bugs in a GPL-licenced software? Or maybe
there is a different reason for signing the NDA? Perhaps the admins
can access some sensitive data other than IP addresses, etc., which
volunteer checkusers and oversighters also have access to, without the
need to sign anything?

And just by the way (I think Sarah mentioned that): you just need to
Google for "non-disclosure agreement" to find examples of
organisations publicly sharing their NDAs--since it is no secret what
is usually covered by such documents, why would the WMF not publish
their NDA?

--
Tomasz W. Kozłowski
a.k.a. [[user:odder]]

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's non-disclosure agreement

Federico Leva (Nemo)
Two small points:
* you don't always need to sign something to enter a contract or accept
a regulation;
* I know that laws sometimes (e.g. Italy) require orgs to clearly tell
users who's managing their data and to teach such delegates what they
must do, but I suppose they don't necessarily care about additional
legal sovrastructures that reiterate what the laws themselves order.

Nemo

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
1234