Legal:Wikimedia Legal Disclaimer: Difference between revisions
Geoffbrigham (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Geoffbrigham (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
If you have participated in discussions with Wikimedia Foundation legal team, you may have noticed that advice is often bookended with a disclaimer stating that the attorney acts as a counselor for the Foundation exclusively and that we are not offering legal advice. |
If you have participated in discussions with Wikimedia Foundation legal team, you may have noticed that advice is often bookended with a disclaimer stating that the attorney acts as a counselor for the Foundation exclusively and that we are not offering legal advice. |
||
As an organization headquartered in San Francisco, California, our lawyers must abide by the state’s rules of professional conduct or else risk being disciplined by the California Bar. Disciplinary action could result in reputational damage, disbarment, or potential legal liability. Under California’s Rules of Professional Conduct, we can only provide professional advice to the Wikimedia Foundation itself.[1] As in-house lawyers for the Foundation, we may not represent other clients, including community members. Compliance with these ethics provisions is not intended to build a wall between the organization and its constituents, for we know that without our community, there could be no |
As an organization headquartered in San Francisco, California, our lawyers must abide by the state’s rules of professional conduct or else risk being disciplined by the California Bar. Disciplinary action could result in reputational damage, disbarment, or potential legal liability. Under California’s Rules of Professional Conduct, we can only provide professional advice to the Wikimedia Foundation itself.[1] As in-house lawyers for the Foundation, we may not represent other clients, including unfortunately community members. Compliance with these ethics provisions is not intended to build a wall between the organization and its constituents, for, as in our case, we know that without our community, there could be no Wikimedia Foundation. However, the ethics directives are firm that, as in-house lawyers, we can only professionally advise one client in this type of situation, namely the Wikimedia Foundation. |
||
Furthermore, individuals’ legal inquiries are shaped by the specific facts of their case and the laws of the applicable jurisdiction. As the legal team of a nonprofit organization |
Furthermore, individuals’ legal inquiries are shaped by the specific facts of their case and the laws of the applicable jurisdiction. As the legal team of a nonprofit organization with an enormous volunteer base, we are not in a position to understand fully the facts of every case, preventing us from offering thorough, individualized advice, even if it were possible. For this reason, we use the above disclaimer to ensure our discussions are not misunderstood in their purpose as we communicate to community members about topics of legal interest. |
||
[1] Rule 3-100 cmt. 1; 3-600(D) http://rules.calbar.ca.gov/Portals/10/documents/2013_CaliforniaRulesofProfessionalConduct.pdf |
[1] See Rule 3-100 cmt. 1; 3-600(D) http://rules.calbar.ca.gov/Portals/10/documents/2013_CaliforniaRulesofProfessionalConduct.pdf |
||
Revision as of 05:02, 30 August 2013
If you have participated in discussions with Wikimedia Foundation legal team, you may have noticed that advice is often bookended with a disclaimer stating that the attorney acts as a counselor for the Foundation exclusively and that we are not offering legal advice.
As an organization headquartered in San Francisco, California, our lawyers must abide by the state’s rules of professional conduct or else risk being disciplined by the California Bar. Disciplinary action could result in reputational damage, disbarment, or potential legal liability. Under California’s Rules of Professional Conduct, we can only provide professional advice to the Wikimedia Foundation itself.[1] As in-house lawyers for the Foundation, we may not represent other clients, including unfortunately community members. Compliance with these ethics provisions is not intended to build a wall between the organization and its constituents, for, as in our case, we know that without our community, there could be no Wikimedia Foundation. However, the ethics directives are firm that, as in-house lawyers, we can only professionally advise one client in this type of situation, namely the Wikimedia Foundation. Furthermore, individuals’ legal inquiries are shaped by the specific facts of their case and the laws of the applicable jurisdiction. As the legal team of a nonprofit organization with an enormous volunteer base, we are not in a position to understand fully the facts of every case, preventing us from offering thorough, individualized advice, even if it were possible. For this reason, we use the above disclaimer to ensure our discussions are not misunderstood in their purpose as we communicate to community members about topics of legal interest.
[1] See Rule 3-100 cmt. 1; 3-600(D) http://rules.calbar.ca.gov/Portals/10/documents/2013_CaliforniaRulesofProfessionalConduct.pdf