[Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's non-disclosure agreement

MZMcBride z at mzmcbride.com
Wed Mar 6 23:00:03 UTC 2013

Sarah Stierch wrote:
>Most organizations don't walk around releasing their NDA's. In fact, I
>don't know a single organization that would engage people to do so. And
>even though WMF is WMF, I don't think it's bad for it to hold onto some
>professional practices like that. It's common practice, in the States,
>for non and for profits to do. I always thought it was funny that NDA's
>existed at WMF just because of the openness, but, at the same time, it's
>industry standard and doesn't phase me. People should be glad WMF has one.

Generally I'd agree that it'd be an unusual request. On the other hand, if
the Wikimedia Foundation is requiring certain _volunteers_ to sign
non-disclosure agreements, I think that changes matters.

Deryck Chan wrote:
>As far as I know, NDAs are primarily for protecting people's privacy.

Given who is and who is not being asked to sign NDAs, I'm not sure this
definition is totally accurate, at least not in the context of Wikimedia.

Keegan Peterzell wrote:
>On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 10:48 AM, Deryck Chan <deryckchan at wikimedia.hk>
>>As far as I know, NDAs are primarily for protecting people's privacy.
>That's my understanding as well.  I have a NDA with the WMF as a volunteer
>from a couple years ago to help with fundraising after I no longer
>contracted for the foundation in order to access the donations CRM.

Out of curiosity, if you sign an NDA as a volunteer, what is the
"disclosure period", then? Is it indefinite?


More information about the Wikimedia-l mailing list