Grant Update Legal Research Working Group Update - Jan 2019

Unrestricted Public Thread

  • Viewed BI Foundation BI Foundation Bedrock Solutions Bedrock Solutions Blockrock Mining Blockrock Mining BuildingIM BuildingIM Canonical Ledgers Canonical Ledgers Crypto Logic Crypto Logic Cube3 Cube3 DBGrow DBGrow De Facto De Facto Factom Inc. Factom Inc. Factomatic Factomatic Factomize Factomize Factoshi Factoshi Federate This Federate This Go Immutable Guides HashnStore HashnStore LUCIAP LUCIAP LayerTech Matt Osborne Matter of Fact Matter of Fact Multicoin Capital Multicoin Capital Nic R Prestige IT Prestige IT RewardChain RewardChain Stamp-IT Stamp-IT The Factoid Authority The Factoid Authority VBIF VBIF
  • Not Viewed Syncroblock Syncroblock
Hi Everyone,
It's been extremely busy several months. Thanks to everyone who participated in all of the conversations/votes on Factomize! We've accomplished a ton in 2018, and 2019 is shaping up to be no different. Our biggest challenge has not been the execution of work, but instead has been not overwhelming the community with too many discussion at one time. To somewhat alleviate this issue, we began working with the Guides to ensure that all community discussions (be it "legal" related or "non-legal") are properly prioritized as opposed to all discussions being released at once. We'll continue to do our best to not overwhelm the community.

Here's the latest on all things Legal:

*The community voted to establish a non-profit in the state of Wyoming
*The Legal Research Working Group will be providing a framework of the bylaws from which the standing parties can shape and mold as they see fit. More on this soon.
*Assuming the price of FCT does not crater, the Legal research Working Group is planning on using our grant money to pay for the costs associated with the construction of the non-profit.

*We hope to have a plan of action publicly announced in next several weeks. More on this soon.

1. CLA Clarification from Inc per their comments at the ANO Summit: Awaiting response.

2. Trademark: Factom Inc has released Guidelines on TM usage. It's suggested the community explore the pros and cons of this deeper. More on this in the coming month(s).

3. FIP System: Niels has been hard at work on this. Our understanding is that he should have something for the community in the next several weeks.

4. Standing Party Buildout: Continuing to provide legal assistance when needed

5. Committees/Working Groups: In order to avoid the appearance of centralization (as well as avoiding actual centralization), we'll be providing suggestions on how the terms "committees" and "working groups" should be used, if they should be alluded to in the Governance, etc. More on this soon.


Goal: The Governance document is the bedrock of our project. Therefore, it's suggested that we make it as airtight as possible by enhancing it with the appropriate legalese. This is a pretty big endeavor, @Julian Fletcher-Taylor has been working hard on this. Timeline - Month(s).

Researched alternative grant round structures. For example, allowing ANOs to control their own pool of FCT and allocate to grants individually. The Legal Research Working Group, especially @Nikola , helped the community avoid going down a path that would have opened up all types of problems with the IRS.

*ANO Expectations Document
*ANO Removal Documents
*Document Management Processes
*Guide Election and Removal Documents
*Exchange Listings: Provided suggestion (token comparison grid) of how to circumvent the issue of exchanges wanting a letter from a lawyer saying "Factom is decentralized."

Thanks to @Shuang Leng and @Nikola for all their hard work! Several years from now, when we all look back on the rollout of the Factom (R) Protocol project, I think we'll all realize the tremendous advantage we had by having two passionate and skillful attorneys intimately involved with our project. Let's make sure we never take that for granted!
Thank you for your hard work!

We are looking forward to hear about the GDPR framework. Will it be valid for all comunity platforms including the comunity drive, or for factomize/factomprotocol only? What about the process that requires us to write down personal information? We mean the processes like grant/ano/guide-applications?
Thank you @Matt Osborne for this update.
Do you have more info on the plan for GDPR?

Also really interested in GDPR issues. I am trying to work on this on my side (for our solution). I will do 2 free legal advice in a Paris Law Faculty in March and April and moreover I will meet a Professor in Digital Law to see whether she is intered or not in collaborating in a way or another with us.
If I have some valuable insights I will let you know.
Sure I can do that.
We have been discussing that issues with Alex some time ago.
I have some material from the French authority (CNIL). It gives us just guidelines but can still be interesting. I have maybe some other relevant materials but it would then be more public articles giving personal interpretation by professional.
I already hope to be able to collaborate with this professor as she is a specialist of that kind of questions (she is a bit more around IA now).