On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 10:13 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
2009/5/26 Michael Bimmler mbimmler@gmail.com:
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