[OpenID board] pay-to-play an issue?

Johannes Ernst jernst at netmesh.us
Thu Apr 5 16:50:03 UTC 2007

I believe the Foundation
  - MUST: govern the IP
  - MAY: do other stuff such as marketing.

Personally, I think it really should also do marketing, but if it  
won't hold the trademarks, say, who will?

Given this, the membership structure and revenue structure
  - MUST: be consistent with a good IP governance model
  - SHOULD: be consistent with other activities.

On Apr 5, 2007, at 9:43, Recordon, David wrote:

> Yes, I think Scott hit the nail on the head.  If the Foundation is
> purely a marketing organization then I see no problems with any  
> sort of
> pay-to-play type model.  If it manages anything community related
> (domains, trademark, IP) then I unequivocally feel any sort of
> pay-to-play model is the incorrect choice.
> I think the question before us is if we can balance these two  
> functions.
> Could the organization at the top be around the community and thus a
> merit based governing model and then have a working group around
> marketing with its own chair and council which is based partially upon
> who has contributed what?  Another model would be having some sort of
> financial oversight committee made up of those that donated to the
> Foundation.
> --David
> -----Original Message-----
> From: board-bounces at openid.net [mailto:board-bounces at openid.net] On
> Behalf Of Scott Kveton
> Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2007 9:21 AM
> To: board at openid.net
> Subject: Re: [OpenID board] pay-to-play an issue?
>> I was reflecting on David's comments about having board membership
>> having  a pay-to-play aspect.
> Having just mentioned this in my last note, I'll follow-up as well.
>> If the Foundation controlled the specifications, I would be very
>> aligned with David on NOT having it pay to play -- but given the
>> charter of protecting IP and marketing -- essentially those paying  
>> are
>> those that have chosen to pool their marketing dollars, and  
>> coordinate
>> their efforts -- so it makes sense for those people to participate in
>> how those dollars are spent -- so it is a pay-to- market issue.
>> With Apache, there is a clear marketing advantage to being listed  
>> with
>> Apache given their history and they essentially are selling pay-
>> to-market with a clear path on how marketing is done, and it is for
>> exposure of the company to the Apache community. Apache does not need
>> to do much marketing themselves these days -- where as OpenID does
>> need to get some clear messages out there, and so a pay-to-market
>> model for people to come on board makes tons of sense to me -- and
>> clearly is the model some people are looking for given some
>> conversations with some of the players.
> This is the core issue IMHO; is the OpenID Foundation a marketing  
> group
> or an organization for managing the mechanics of the OpenID community
> (namely IP, trademarks, etc)?  Or both?  In a perfect world, I'd  
> love to
> have the OpenID Foundation do lots of things, however, we've got to  
> get
> some key things done _now_.  We can always add marketing efforts  
> later.
> As for how Apache does this, I would say that they are very clear that
> when you "sponsor" Apache you get nothing in return that drives
> direction of the organization.  You get your name on a sponsors  
> page and
> that's about it.
> They are vehement about that (which I think is part of the reason for
> their
> success) as it makes it clear to the community and everyone  
> involved the
> roll of companies with Apache.
> Looking forward to more discussion on the call today,
> - Scott
> _______________________________________________
> board mailing list
> board at openid.net
> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board
> _______________________________________________
> board mailing list
> board at openid.net
> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board

Johannes Ernst
NetMesh Inc.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: openid-relying-party-authenticated.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 903 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-board/attachments/20070405/963df210/attachment-0006.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: lid.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 973 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-board/attachments/20070405/963df210/attachment-0007.gif>
-------------- next part --------------

More information about the board mailing list