I agree. Our policy for making such a decision may be found <a href="http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Legal_and_Community_Advocacy/Foundation_Policy_and_Political_Association_Guideline#Collaborative_Advocacy">here</a> (summarized below).<div>
<br></div><div>I don't anticipate any issue for staff approval. </div><div><br></div><div>Does anybody on this list object? </div><div><br></div><div>If not, can someone start a quick RfC? <div><br></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:14px;line-height:21px;font-family:sans-serif"><h3 style="color:black;background-image:none;background-color:initial;font-weight:bold;margin-top:0px;margin-right:0px;margin-bottom:0.3em;margin-left:0px;overflow-x:hidden;overflow-y:hidden;padding-top:0.5em;padding-bottom:0.17em;border-bottom-width:initial;border-bottom-style:none;border-bottom-color:initial;font-size:19px;background-repeat:initial initial">
<span class="mw-headline" id="Collaborative_Advocacy">Collaborative Advocacy</span></h3><p style="margin-top:0.4em;margin-right:0px;margin-bottom:0.5em;margin-left:0px;line-height:1.5em">We collaborate with another organization to take action on a particular policy or political question.</p>
<ul style="line-height:1.5em;list-style-type:disc;margin-top:0.3em;margin-right:0px;margin-bottom:0px;margin-left:1.6em;padding-top:0px;padding-right:0px;padding-bottom:0px;padding-left:0px"><li style="margin-bottom:0.1em">
<i>Example: Signing a petition started by the Electronic Frontier Foundation against Internet censorship.</i></li></ul><dl style="margin-top:0.2em;margin-bottom:0.5em"><dt style="font-weight:bold;margin-bottom:0.1em">Review and Approval</dt>
</dl><ul style="line-height:1.5em;list-style-type:disc;margin-top:0.3em;margin-right:0px;margin-bottom:0px;margin-left:1.6em;padding-top:0px;padding-right:0px;padding-bottom:0px;padding-left:0px"><li style="margin-bottom:0.1em">
<b>Staff</b>: General Counsel (approval), CFA (approval), Head of Communications (consultation), and Executive Director (approval)</li><li style="margin-bottom:0.1em"><b>Community</b>: Advocacy Advisory Group (consultation), RfC (consultation if time permits), and General notice</li>
<li style="margin-bottom:0.1em"><b>Board</b>: Possible consultation</li></ul></span><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 1:23 PM, Mathias Schindler <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mathias.schindler@wikimedia.de" target="_blank">mathias.schindler@wikimedia.de</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">FYI. (it is my opinion that WMF should support any effort promoting<br>
such an amendment to the copyright act)<br>
<br>
<a href="https://law.resource.org/pub/edicts.html" target="_blank">https://law.resource.org/pub/edicts.html</a><br>
<br>
TEXT OF THE PETITION<br>
<br>
To promote access to justice, equal protection, innovation in the<br>
legal marketplace, and to codify long-standing public policy, the<br>
Copyright Act of the United States, 17 U.S.C., should be amended as<br>
follows:<br>
<br>
“Edicts of government, such as judicial opinions, administrative<br>
rulings, legislative enactments, public ordinances, and similar<br>
official legal documents are not copyrightable for reasons of public<br>
policy. This applies to such works whether they are Federal, State, or<br>
local as well as to those of foreign governments.”<br>
<br>
This language comes directly from Section 206.01, Compendium of Office<br>
Practices II, U.S. Copyright Office (1984). It reflects clear and<br>
established Supreme Court precedent on the matter in cases such as<br>
Wheaton v. Peters, 33 U.S. (8 Pet.) 591 (1834) and Banks v.<br>
Manchester, 128 U.S. 244 (1888). The law belongs to the people, who<br>
should be free to read, know, and speak the laws by which they choose<br>
to govern themselves.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
--<br>
Mathias Schindler<br>
Projektmanager<br>
Wikimedia Deutschland e.V.<br>
web: <a href="http://www.wikimedia.de" target="_blank">http://www.wikimedia.de</a><br>
mail: <a href="mailto:mathias.schindler@wikimedia.de">mathias.schindler@wikimedia.de</a><br>
<br>
Ceterum censeo opera officiales esse liberandam -<br>
<a href="http://urheberrecht.wikimedia.de/" target="_blank">http://urheberrecht.wikimedia.de/</a><br>
<br>
Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.<br>
V. Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts<br>
Berlin-Charlottenburg unter der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig<br>
anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin,<br>
Steuernummer <a href="tel:27%2F681%2F51985" value="+12768151985">27/681/51985</a>.<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Advocacy_Advisors mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Advocacy_Advisors@lists.wikimedia.org">Advocacy_Advisors@lists.wikimedia.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors" target="_blank">https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br>Geoff Brigham<br>General Counsel <br>Wikimedia Foundation<br>149 New Montgomery Street<br>San Francisco, CA 94105<br>+1 (415) 839-6885 ext. 6750<br><a href="mailto:gbrigham@wikimedia.org" target="_blank">gbrigham@wikimedia.org</a><br>
<br><i>California Registered In-House Counsel</i><br><br><div style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">
<i>This message might have confidential or legally privileged information
in it. If you have received this message by accident, please delete it
and let us know about the mistake. For legal reasons, I may only serve as an attorney for
the Wikimedia Foundation. This means I may not give legal advice to or serve
as a lawyer for community members, volunteers, or staff members in their personal capacity.</i></div>
<br><br><br><br>
</div></div>