on 28/10/99 7:33 PM, opencard-digest at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> on the partnership question: I would like to suggest two levels of membership:
> partner, and associate. Associates would be able to come and go as they
> please, and have no liability or responsability. In exchange for a reasonable
> amount of work they would be able to keep a copy of the metaCard engine, plus
> mention in the credits. Partners would have decision making authority: they
> would have to agree unanimously before admitting a new partner. All persons
> (associates and partners) would have to agree to change the partnership
> agreement. Partners would determine whether the associate has done enough work
> to merit the engine. The partnership would be a charitable organization.
> Anyone may ask to enter into the association. Admission would be based on a
> majority vote of partners and associates, based upon the contribution offered
> by the associate.
This sounds like something we have discussed before and is close to what was
suggested by MetaCard, I would suggest we go with something like this. So
(semi) briefly:
Registered members of the OpenCard [consortium | collaboration] may be
registered as one of two "levels". a) Associate member and b) partner.
Associate members do not have guaranteed voting rights (though they may be
allowed to vote on some issues as deemed by the partners) and may contribute
code, access OpenCard resources such as the UFP server via ftp etc and are
legally not considered to be a part of the OpenCard [consortium |
collaboration] and as such have no liability or responsibility. Associates
are bound by the associate agreement which they must agree to before
becoming an associate. (This would state things like them using the server
for it's intended purpose and basically be a combination of all the
agreements we have all agreed to already.)
Partners have voting rights on all issues (except perhaps for things like
revoking their partnership status) and may contribute code, access OpenCard
resources but are considered legally a part of the OpenCard [consortium |
collaboration] and may be held legally responsible for the actions of the
OpenCard [consortium | collaboration] (I really don't like the sound of that
and it is definitely not worded correctly). Partners are bound by the
partnership agreement which can only be changed by a unanimous vote by
partners. (Our agreement with MetaCard would then state the Partners gain
access to a MetaCard licence for OpenCard development).
A person is an associate member of the OpenCard [collaboration | consortium]
if and only if they are a member of the "general" mailing list (currently
this one, but if multiple lists are used it would be the one that everyone
should be a part of). An associate member may request that they be made a
partner and this request will be fullfilled if a majority of the current
partners (who choose to vote on the issue?) vote in favour of the associate
member becoming a partner.
This is basically what has been said on the list before but slightly
reworded structured and with a few problems pointed out. ie: 1) Should it
be possible to remove a partner from the partnership? 2) What is the name
of our group? 3) Exactly how are we legally liable if we are partners? 4)
Should decisions be made when the majority of the people who choose to vote
agree, the majority of people agree or when everyone agrees? (What tells me
we're heading right back to the OOPD list discussions again...)
Hmm, we're very slowly making progress on this I think. :)
Adrian Sutton
**************************************************************
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ph: 3714 4649
Don't go around saying the world owes you a living.
The world owe's you nothing - it was here first.
-- Mark Twain.
**************************************************************
