[OpenID] Membership vs. IPR agreements

[SitG Admin]

>On the downside, the membership/contribution terms bind I, the 
>member/contributor, to byelaws that the Board sets from time to 
>time- which have no defined scope or limit. The board may decide to 
>set rules on the handling of these emails on your home computer, for 
>example, if it so wishes; to these you are now agreeing.

To mangle an old saying, the Board sets and the Board resets. The 
terms have changed, but they still have your agreement. You can 
terminate your membership, but are unlikely to do so unless you know 
conditions have become intolerable to you (and the Foundation isn't 
required to directly notify you, just to publish the current version 
on their web site - the wording doesn't even imply that they will 
publish a notice that there is a new version!), so you may find out 
after you are already liable for breach of contract. Of course, any 
changes are likely to be discussed on the lists well in advance, and 
as a member you would be given a chance to vote on it - but that 
raises the question, how long before a new change comes into effect? 
If immediately, members would have to decide between gambling on the 
success of their vote (but committing to stay in if they failed, 
until they could get their termination request mailed), and pulling 
out in advance to be certain it wouldn't apply to them (but giving up 
their vote, and thus chance to stop it).

And, of course, a hostile Board (or one swayed by persuasive 
arguments, with other Board members silenced by their oaths to OIDF) 
could simply push through a change as a secret Board matter, one that 
had to be kept secret from the general community (and even ordinary 
Members) until bylaws could be introduced to address it . . . this 
may *seem* paranoid, but THINK! This is what we DO: the OpenID 
protocol itself is designed to address and *preclude* the possibility 
of any single hostile party from compromising the entire process. We 
acknowledge the problem and take steps to make sure it will not 
occur. If we hold the Board above human weakness, dismiss the 
possibility of corruption out of hand, and generally expect everyone 
to "just trust them", it'll be a shameful double standard.

At the very least, there should be a delay before new rules kick in, 
during which all members are notified directly and they have the 
option (and a fair opportunity) to withdraw their membership.

-Shade