Just a quick correction, you say that "Even a paid researcher on a university project would not meet this definition, unless the project were part funded or in partnership with Wikimedia. "
This is not quite accurate: even a student on a university project would meet this definition if his university had: 1. Signed a quick licence<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Trademark/License/GLAM> (an agreement between the University and the WMF) 2. Paid for the student's scholarship (a contracted payment from the University to the student) This would apply under the current definition *even if* *the student's studies are entirely unrelated to Wikimedia.* This is because the student would be a "contractor" of an "organizations having [an agreement] with Wikimedia". It could easily be read that a 'paid volunteer': - "Has to be an employee, contractor or part time contractor of [anyone who has signed any agreement with any Wikimedia organisation or person describing themselves as part of Wikimedia]. - Has to [contribute to Wikimedia, but not necessarily edit]. - This includes [anyone whose employer benefits from Wikimedia in any way]." I know that this seems hysterical, but experience has shown that we need to define these things accurately, and the definition is much too broad at present. It has the effect of including all employees and contractors (even unpaid) of all organisations which have ever so much as signed a single page agreement with anyone from "Wikimedia". We have to ask: 1. How are we defining "Wikimedia"? Does it include, say, user groups? Could it include single persons in some cases? 2. Why are we including people who are not actually paid to edit the projects, but might be paid to, for example, mine coal - but edit the projects when they get home? 3. Does this include organisations where there is an "unwritten agreement"? What about a draft agreement? A complex issue! Richard Symonds Wikimedia UK 0207 065 0992 Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects). *Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.* On 4 April 2014 16:49, Fæ <fae...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 4 April 2014 14:33, Gryllida <gryll...@fastmail.fm> wrote: > > On Fri, 4 Apr 2014, at 22:14, Fæ wrote: > >> *Definition of "paid volunteer":* > >> Paid volunteers are employees, contractors or part time contractors of > >> Wikimedia organizations or other organizations having agreements or > >> partnerships with Wikimedia. The paid volunteer contributes to Wikimedia > >> projects and discussions that influence the content of Wikimedia > projects. > >> This includes employees and contractors that may not be paid for their > >> on-project activities, however their employer benefits from the content > of > >> the same projects. > ... > > If I am a student and write wikipedia articles about commercial software > my university uses in my free time, I satisfy this definition. However, I > would have no conflict of interest here, as neither I nor my university > gets paid for the new information I would write. > ... > > I do not understand how you are reading the definition to believe it > would apply to students writing about some software they happen to > use. Students pay the university to be on a course, or receive a grant > from a funding body which they then pay the university, not the > reverse. To be clear, this definition does not apply to students, they > are not: > * employees who are also volunteers > * volunteers who are receiving money or given significant assets for > improving content of Wikimedia projects > > Even a paid researcher on a university project would not meet this > definition, unless the project were part funded or in partnership with > Wikimedia. In that latter case, yes, we would want their interest to > be declared when they were acting as a volunteer contributor to > Wikimedia projects and at the same time benefiting their university > project or advocating for further projects where they were likely to > be employed/contracted or be credited for associated academic > publications. > > What is proposed here is *not* a general conflict of interest policy, > it is a specific policy of transparency directed at Wikimedia > organization employees or employees of Wikimedia partners on > programmes directly related to Wikimedia projects in the same way as > can be claimed for the Belfer case. Vague associations like an > employee of a Wikimedia partner organization who has no connection to > a Wikimedia partnership are tangential ideas, having nothing to do > with this proposal. > > Fae > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
