Forum OpenACS Q&A: Re: Template contract for OpenACS projects

Collapse
Posted by Staffan Hansson on
Behaviour in the OpenACS community cannot possibly be part of a *legal* contract betweeen an OpenACS company and a client. Not only is it legally not feasible but it would also violate the spirit of the GPL (freedom).

Peter, if we find my draft contract legalistic to the extreme, it doesn't mean that the solution is for us to become anarchists... 😉

Of course a legal contract between the business parties in an OpenACS project cannot and does not dictate the behavior of the community members at large. But it can and does dictate the behavior or required performances of the contract signing business parties themselves. Even if community members in general were to appreciate complete freedom to behave as they please (which I doubt they do), contracting parties certainly love rules and the predictability that follows from them. After all, legal contracts - including the GPL - state the responsibilities of the agreeing parties for the main purpose of protecting their freedom.

Reportedly, OpenACS professionals could use an explicit statement of what is considered professional behavior when conducting an OpenACS project. If such a statement of acceptable norms of behavior is not produced with the help of the community (perhaps because we find it not feasable or in violation of our free spirit), it will be produced anyway - everytime a business contract for an OpenACS project is negotiated. But then it will not be a general or common statement, and as a result there will not form a standardized professional behavior, that is, a professional standard, within OpenACS.

Having this statement displayed on the OpenACS website is a very good idea. Further, I have gotten the impression that the parties (both companies and clients) that are signing business contracts for OpenACS projects would like to be able to append the readymade statement to their particular contracts, like they would append the GPL, so that they can formally agree on it. That way they wouldn't have to waste time writing provisions of their own regarding common aspects of conducting work on the OpenACS toolkit. Instead they could focus on the more project specific details of the contract.

About the applauding, I always thought the good example is set by the guy who is doing something applaudable, not by the guy who is applauding. I also worry about inflation: applause are much appreciated, yes, but I see a risk of the applause being devaluated if we start applauding each other's applause or applauding for the sake of applauding. I for one would like to know that I'm being applauded for some achievement I've made and not because it's the community standard to applaude people to the left and right. I suggest that we state a legal limit of 5-6 applause per OpenACS project. Just kidding.