On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 10:13 AM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com> wrote:
2009/5/26 Michael Bimmler <mbimmler(a)gmail.com>om>:
May I also say that the Committee is a very nice
venue to share and compare
legal advice received by chapters in a confidential setting? WmCH for
example has mandated a lawyer to review the agreement and we have already
received a first analysis with quite a lot of detailed comments (from a
Swiss perspective, of course, but many of them globally applicable) -- and
we have sent these comments on to the committee or are just about to do so.
Discussions between chapters I have absolutely no problem with and
whole heartedly encourage. It is WMUK (or any other chapter, for that
matter) negotiating, directly or indirectly, with the WMF (and if
we're involved in the committee, then the committee negotiating with
WMF is WMUK indirectly negotiating with WMF) before seeking legal
advice that I strongly advise against.
Yes - well, the committee is not negotiating with anyone as far as I
am informed. I believe it has or will advise the WMF board soon of its
mandate and membership, but other than that, it is still very much in
a setting up and brainstomring procedure, it has not even asked the
chapter for their official input yet, which is obviously something way
before starting negotiations. I think at the moment it is really just
about comparing notes (be it from chapters board members or external
lawyers).
I suggest that WmUK takes active part in these discussions and "throws
in" the advice from its lawyer as soon as it receives such advice.
Getting legal advice once the
negotiations are complete is too late.
Of course.
Michael
--
Michael Bimmler
mbimmler(a)gmail.com