Improving the affiliation scheme of the OSMF

Foundation
, , , ,
21

To be “listed as an official LC” the org. needs to have signed the paperwork with the OSMF. You should ask that group why they haven’t done that.

Alas, a known issue for years, and something that often affects the global south. In the past, the OSMF Board was open to paying some costs that might be needed. Perhaps ask the board about that now?

22

See

I note that that doesn’t stop them from using the OSMF “logo”/name on the website.

2 Likes
23

Hi all, the OSM Affiliation Models will be discussed in LCC Congress happening today. Will provide update after the discussions. Thanks! Foundation/Local Chapters/Local Chapters Congress/2024 - OpenStreetMap Wiki

24

Hi all, apologies for being quiet on this thread for a while. LCCWG will be hosting a discussion session about OSMF Affiliation Model on 30th October, Wednesday, 14:00 UTC. You are welcome to join.

osmcal link: OSMF Affiliation Models brainstorming | OpenStreetMap Calendar (meeting link, highlights re LCC Congress discussion and more details within the week)

Thanks!

1 Like
25

Hi Arnalie

Wondering if there any published updates from this?

I’ve just been appointed as the Oceania rep to the Advisory Board, so guessing that would possibly also mean that I should be part of LCCWG?

We’re also trying to get the OSM Oceania group back up & running.

Wouldn’t mind doing so, but that’s midnight for me, so well & truly past bedtime! :grinning:

1 Like
26

I created this wiki page to publicly document our efforts/discussion re: improving the affiliation scheme of the OSMF Improving the affiliation scheme of the OSMF - OpenStreetMap Wiki

feel free to add any discussions and key takeaways you made or know by editing the page directly. Thanks and see you on the 30th October: OSMF Affiliation Models brainstorming | OpenStreetMap Calendar

1 Like
27

just shared updates in the thread :slight_smile:

Wonderful, you can join LCCWG by getting in touch via email local@osmfoundation.org.

However, the current LCCWG meeting is set at 13:00 UTC :confused:

And sorry about the timing of the session. Maybe we can arrange one that can accommodate UTC +5 and above timezones.

1 Like
28

Message sent :grinning:

That’d be great! How did you work Board meetings from the Philippines? :thinking:

1 Like
29

We worked out a way and stick to it. We settled on 13:30 UTC which is 21:30 Ph time (UTC+8). We have board members from ET (UTC -4/5) and sometimes our moving board member @cRaIgalLAn is in the west coast (UTC -7/8). So it was a big commitment to work/brainstorm/make informed decision later/early in your day. Hehe

30

I made mention of this issue in regard to OSMF Board meetings a while back, & Allan M, who was President at the time responded “Do you want us to be awake at the Meeting?” :grinning:

1 Like
31

Hi all!

Thank you to those who joined the session last week. Sending the highlights and suggested next steps here:

notes: OSMF Affiliation Models brainstorming - HackMD

Highlights:

  • Brief Review and insights: LCCWG efforts on improving OSMF Affiliation
  • A different affiliation model, with less burden, would really impact us positively.
  • Do we need/want different affiliation schemes for community groups (contributors) and for groups with commercial activities?
    — Eg different small companies eg paid mapping, map services, using OSM in various businesses (different actors would like to use OSM data but they dont know how to use data - it is easier for them to have a group of professional (consultancy)), we want to promote OSM in our business, we do things in the spirit on the rules of the Foundation and being affiliated is something we want to do and apply to so we can comply with OSMF
    — scope of small business - how big, what you do? who gives you money / who are you making business with? eg program with govt/NGO (not commercial)

Suggested next steps for LCCWG:

  • Review affiliation models of other open communities and convene a dedicated team to advance this topic
  • Work on differences and similarities of different types of affiliation (Local Chapters, informal communities, and orgs with some commercial activities), benefits, rights, obligations, etc
  • consult with LWG re trademarks granting and usage for non-registered organizations
  • Conduct discussions session with communities - informal and non-registered org
  • Conduct discussion sessions with formally registered orgs (FPOSM, YOuthmappers, etc)

Note, LCCWG is meeting on Thurs, 7 Nov at 14:00 UTC. You are welcome to join: LCCWG Monthly Meeting | OpenStreetMap Calendar

1 Like
32

Sharing LCCWG meeting notes this Nov, regarding this topic:

Next steps:

  • Create an LCCWG subcommittee for Affiliation models to work on this
    — Arnalie to open call for volunteers on same community forum thread
  • invite everyone who expressed interest and attended previous discussions to join the subcommittee
2 Likes
33

Here is the open call for LCCWG subcommittee on OSMF Affiliation Model Call for Volunteers: Help improve the OSMF Affiliation Model with LCCWG

Overview of tasks and skills are mentioned in the post. If you are interested to join and have the time, please comment on the thread or email local[at]osmfoundation.org :slight_smile:

34

The meeting minutes show the case of MapUganda (aka “OpenStreetMap Uganda”) was brought up, It has applied for, and declined, Local Chapter status in Feb 2022 (I was one of the No votes). I’m disappointed to see the story of “LCs aren’t allowed make money“.

The majority of their income came from paid collection of map data for a local authority, and the data was kept closed source. The LC Agreement says you must uphold the idea of open geo data. ie “LCs are allowed make money. LCs are not allowed to encourage & profit from closed geo data.”

7 Likes
35

Not necessarily, imo.

Common-law jurisdictions have unincorporated associations, so the contract would be with the management acting as agent for the members. It costs nothing. I think France also has unincorporated associations, which suggests to me that civil law jurisdictions generally would also permit this. In some jurisdictions an unincorporated association has legal personality (or can opt for it), which is helpful but not essential.

In lieu of public filings, OSMF could be a member of the association with right to accounts, etc…

There are presumably some jurisdictions where free association is illegal, so even an unincorporated association would be required to register. But then the problem is not the costs of incorporation, but the prohibition on free association.

I think this will depend on the laws of contract in the jurisdiction concerned. If the org has legal personality, whether registered or not, there is definitely no issue. If it doesn’t, and if this were necessary, in lieu of a legally enforcable licence (unenforcable because no legal personality), then the rules of an unregistered org could allow OSMF to be a member who could mandate a change of name away from “OpenStreetMap Terranullius”.

(Personally I think that’s a good idea for LCs generally: it seems to me that LCs don’t give much for their use of the name, and we could be in a situation where a LC goes rogue and hurts the name of OSMF.)

36

A thought: part of formal incorporation for a local group is that it demonstrates ‘seriousness’ and that the group will need to become sustainable to continue in future years, i.e. financially sustainable to pay for annual accounts, etc. and sustainable in personnel by having a plan for new people to come in

3 Likes
37

True, but the cost is roughly inversely proportional to income per capita:

Screenshot 2024-11-19 at 16.02.24

Source: World Bank cost of doing business data

EDIT that’s the total cost of starting a “business”, but obviously incorporation costs is a part of that.

38

@eteb3, this statistics is for companies…

You need to find statistics of related costs to open a non-profit organization.

I agree with @Jez_Nicholson , the registry and the finantial sustainability is the first steps to probe your ‘seriousness’.

If the LCCWG (OSMF) is trying to flexibilize it, can be restrict to the recognizing of smaller and informal groups, OK, but with restrict rights.

It is the initial idea - more formal to represent the country (or region), less formal to includes small groups, but with restrict rights.

It is a security care too, any person can create an account and not be a legitime representant and send fake documents, pictures and other stuff, and ask for be a representant.

And, IMHO, the public consultation will not always identify this case, if the group is smaller or if there is an internal pressure in direction of “not to talk about it”…

39

I realise - it was a rough indicator.

More precise example:
~$160 to register a corporate non-profit in Gambia
~$65 to register a corporate non-profit in the UK

World Bank PPP values (2021) are
Gambia $18
UK $1

So in Gambian terms, it costs $2880 to register a non-profit, or 44 times the cost in the UK.

I do tend to agree with you, but I don’t think we can simply ignore PPP differences [EDIT] and absolute cost differences [\EDIT] of that size.
But maybe the UK is particularly cheap, because we don’t have to go to a notary for anything.

I agree we should be mindful of that. From what I can see (and I’m not all over this topic yet…) I think it might be a good idea if OSMF considers more control of the existing corporate LCs. Incorporation is no guarantee against poor behaviour, or going AWOL. The incorporated LCs are just as independent and beyond OSMF’s control as an unincorporated organisation.

40

Strike the ‘maybe’. though conventional wisdom used to be (thats a couple of decades back) that drafting the incorporation docs and AoA as a tendency was more involved and expensive than elsewhere.

But in any case incorporation itself is just one time, there are other costs that an incorporated group would potentially have to carry and require some kind of stable financing going forward. There are lots of cases for which incorporation and LC status is simply not going to fit.