[OpenID board] Revised local chapters policy
Michael.Jones at microsoft.com
Thu May 8 16:12:27 UTC 2008
Thanks Snorri. I believe this puts us on track to approve an acceptable policy today.
The problem with your proposed wording for #6 is that it doesn't ensure that the IPR or trademarks REMAIN freely available in perpetuity, if for instance, a local chapter drops its affiliation or ceases to exist. It also has the same problem as the Creative Commons proposal -- that it doesn't provide any provisions for policing the trademark -- as a ridiculous example, for preventing an automobile company from branding a new car model with the trademark.
Given the existing approved licensing language is the same as the new drafts, I don't see this clause as a blocking factor for approving a local chapters policy acceptable to all.
From: Snorri [mailto:snorri at snorri.eu]
Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2008 4:48 AM
To: board at openid.net
Cc: Mike Jones; 'Nat Sakimura'
Subject: RE: [OpenID board] Revised local chapters policy
I agree with Mike to accept quickly a simplified online "local chapter
Policy" adapted for many chapters as possible! = to avoid brakes and lost
But in this case I think we can still simplify the current version (and OIDF
accept the simplifications):
#6: just: " Chapters must agree that any intellectual property or trademarks
developed or held by the Chapter must be freely available for use to the
#12! Delete " nation state level"
After (and I agree with Nat), I propose to accept an "agreement" (no really
an Policy) between "National" chapters or "continental" Foundations...
This agreement will mention all answers like translation, trademark,
The criteria will be examined depending the serious of this organization
(IMO the list of members is the better proof)
David, Dick, Nat, Drummond... agree with that?
De : board-bounces at openid.net [mailto:board-bounces at openid.net] De la part
de Nat Sakimura
Envoyé : jeudi 8 mai 2008 08:58
À : board at openid.net
Objet : Re: [OpenID board] Revised local chapters policy
Dick Hardt wrote:
> On 8-May-08, at 8:14 AM, Nat Sakimura wrote:
>> Hi Dick,
>> In this respect, it comes down to the National Chapter governance
>> structure, just same as for OIDF itself.
>> If the governance of the National Chapter is done democratically and
>> openly, then those that are not happy with then current administration
>> should be able to pursuade other members and correct the situation.
> potentially :)
>> At the same time, the organization must have the administrative
>> capability, since otherwise, even if the decision made by the
>> organization is sound, it cannot be executed.
>> So, in essence, we should
>> 1) just define what is an appropreate governance structure for this
>> 2) define what is an appropreate admnistrative capability
>> and use these as the certification criteria.
>> Actually, the same applies to OIDF itself.
>> The content of 1) and 2) above needs more discussion, I think, in
>> the WG
>> level just like Mike indicated. I do not think Local Chapters policy
>> needs to wait for the completion of such.
> So will the OIDF need to review and approve the governance structure
> for each national chapter?
Essentially, yes, but there will not be too many as it will be first
come first served bases then :-)
> I understand and agree the problem can be solved -- the local chapter
> proposal has no process for solving the issue I have raised. What
> would you suggest we add to the proposal so that the process for
> approving a national chapter is not arbitrary?
Well, perhaps you could add at the end of article 12. so that it reads
"OIDF will recognize at most one chapter as the designated national
chapter in a nation-state at any time according to the National Chapters
Nat Sakimura (=nat)
Nomura Research Institute, Ltd.
XDI.ORG Vice Chair
board mailing list
board at openid.net
More information about the board