[Foundation-l] WMF resolution on access to non-public data passed

[Sean Whitton]

I believe that such a paper opinion from the parent would be legally
bounding if we worded it right.

> don't know if WMF can handle enourmous paperwork currently in addition
> to all confirmation process of other people.

There aren't *that* many of us working in these areas - correct me if
I'm wrong, but I don't think it'd be a great deal extra :)

Thanks,
Sean

On 02/05/07, Aphaia <aphaia at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/2/07, Sean Whitton <sean at silentflame.com> wrote:
> > Whoops, gmail keyboard shortcuts can be too good at times... here is the rest:
> >
> > ... others, I think that there is perhaps a way for the Foundation to
> > get round the issue in order to keep volunteers. I know that I handle
> > a good deal of private information for freenode as part of the group
> > registration process, but we are getting round this by using a
> > Non-Consent Agreement - this will allow us to all handle data
> > regardless of age as we are still legally bound. Why would we escape
> > this legally just for being under 18? I'm sure that the law still
> > places a degree of liability upon minors.
>
> Yes but not a total degree. I feel need to add that both parents and
> minors can cancel the deed of minors if the parents give no explicit
> consent retrospective, even after the minor reached adulthood. It
> would be an idea to ask their parents a consent in a paper, but I
> don't know if WMF can handle enourmous paperwork currently in addition
> to all confirmation process of other people.
>
>
> --
> KIZU Naoko
>  Wikiquote: http://wikiquote.org
>  * habent enim emolumentum in labore suo *
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


-- 
—Sean Whitton (seanw)
<sean at silentflame.com>
http://seanwhitton.com/