Second Life Bar Association Meeting TranscriptNov. 8, 2008
Transcript taken by Cat Galileo
[10:02] Legal Writer: Welcome, everyone to our November meeting of the SL Bar Association!
[10:02] Legal Writer: I am standing in as MC this morning for Solomon.
[10:03] Legal Writer: Solomon had to take his daughter to the hospital this morning UK time.
[10:03] Legal Writer: So our thoughts, prayers, and well wishes go to him.
[10:03] Ashcroft Burnham: I hope that she's all right...
[10:03] Legal Writer: As do I.
[10:03] Legal Writer: Before we begin, I will mention that the agenda was passed out, and is also on the board behind me.
[10:04] Legal Writer: The first order of business is to cover the Mission Statement and Goals.
[10:04] Legal Writer: I had, at the last meeting, developed a draft Mission Statement and Goals document.
[10:04] Legal Writer: I passed it around the exec board, and Lexis Looming gave me comments on the document.
[10:04] Legal Writer: Thank you, Lexis!
[10:05] Legal Writer: I have now posted the goals document on the forum.
[10:05] Legal Writer: I will give you a URL in a second.
[10:05] Legal Writer: But the purpose is to say, please, everyone take a look at it and comment on it, if you would like to
make suggestions.
[10:05] Legal Writer: I would very much appreciate whatever comments you might have.
[10:06] Legal Writer: As part of the strategic planning process, it is important to understand our core mission, purpose,
goals and values.
[10:06] Ashcroft Burnham thinks that the agenda looks reasonable.
[10:06] Legal Writer: Once we understand those, it should be much clearer what we do day to day and month to month to move
forward the work of our association.
[10:06] Legal Writer: So, with that, again, please take a look at the document on the forum, and pass along comments to me.
[10:07] Legal Writer: I can be reached at swu@ckwlaw.com with comments.
[10:07] Legal Writer: The document is on pdf, but if anyone wants a Word version to use track changes, I can send that to
you.
[10:07] Legal Writer: Here is the URL: http://www.slba.info/forum/YaBB.pl?board=stratplan
[10:08] Legal Writer: Thanks go to Cat for placing the forum on the site. Thank you, Cat!
[10:08] Cat Galileo: welcome
[10:08] Cat Galileo: finelly figured out how :)
[10:08] Legal Writer: And now, we move to the second item on the agenda. The seminar series.
[10:08] Legal Writer: Cat, can you please come up and give us an update on that?
[10:08] Cat Galileo: hi folks.
[10:09] Cat Galileo: we are running our second "series" of continuing ed this fall
[10:09] Cat Galileo: we had 1 session already (my own on legal research on the internet) and second one today (Ben Noble on
ethics in virtual worlds)
[10:10] Cat Galileo: so far the response has been good
[10:10] Cat Galileo: attendence is free, but as of today's session, if you want / need a CA certificate we are charging $25
to offset certification costs
[10:10] Ashcroft Burnham: Will there be any more accredited with England and Wales CPD?
[10:11] Cat Galileo: if you're interested in seeing more about the sessions visit http://slba.info/speakerseries.html
[10:11] Cat Galileo: solomon and I will need to discuss it. it was his firm that sponsored that
[10:11] Cat Galileo: i would like to, of course, provide credit in as many jurisdictions as possible
[10:12] Cat Galileo: we currently have 1 more session scheduled, solomon on enforcement
[10:12] Ashcroft Burnham: It'd be most useful :-)
[10:12] Cat Galileo: and if anyone is interested in speaking or suggesting topics. please let me or Geri know.
[10:12] Jai Baxter: Cat?
[10:12] Cat Galileo: Does anyone have any questions?
[10:12] Cat Galileo: yes Jai?
[10:12] Jai Baxter: :) here
[10:12] Didier Doflug: does this require contacting each jurisdiction separately? if so, perhaps we could set up a special
"task force" to make those contacts so you don't have to do it all
[10:13] Jai Baxter: I SUpport the fe -sems sensble - but wondering if it was a meeting deision, or a spontaneous thing, or
what/AT?
[10:13] Jai Baxter: *fee (USD25)
[10:13] Cat Galileo: ok, Jai, then Didier
[10:13] Cat Galileo: The ex-board approved the fee
[10:13] Cat Galileo: it was not approved in a general meeting
[10:14] Jai Baxter: ;) so I didn;t miss a notice
[10:14] Jai Baxter: nywhere I sould go in thefture to be informed on what things the board does with and without member
consult?
[10:14] Cat Galileo: technically, I am providing the CLE, the SLBA is just letting me use the space
[10:15] Julynn Lilliehook: I don;t see how the cle can cast $25 US for approval
[10:15] Jai Baxter: yes, and it;s appreciated :)realy trying to understand SLBA governance, not the (perfectly sound)
choice
[10:15] Julynn Lilliehook: I can mail it to my state bar for 42 cents
[10:15] Geri Kuhn: You may still attend the lecture without paying the $25.00.
[10:15] Cat Galileo: I dont' nkow, Jai, that's a good question. maybe we can look at the bylaws and see what the board has
authoritity to do -not everything requires member approval
[10:15] Cat Galileo: Didier
[10:15] Cat Galileo: each jurisdiction has it's own requirements
[10:15] Geri Kuhn: The $25.00 is only required if you wish to have CLE.
[10:16] Julynn Lilliehook: I can get the cle approved if I have the qattendance documents from SLBA
[10:16] Cat Galileo: so far what i'm doing is offering to give all reasonable accommodation to out-of-cal folks in terms of
providing the certificate and any other back up info
[10:16] Julynn Lilliehook: But it sounds like I have to $25 to get that
[10:16] Cat Galileo: so assistance finding the requirements in different jursidcitions would be great
[10:16] Cat Galileo: Julynn
[10:16] Cat Galileo: I personally have spent over $500 to get certification from the Cal. State Bar for the sessions we've
held so far
[10:17] Ashcroft Burnham: Maybe some states are more expensive than others?
[10:17] Rose Springvale: I'll help in Texas Cat, but i know they require the outline and fees in advance too
[10:17] Cat Galileo: each session costs $75 for the provider to certify
[10:17] Soro Dagostino: Lets give here a big hand
[10:17] Julynn Lilliehook: In mmy jurisdiction it costs nothiing
[10:17] Cat Galileo: and then there is a $300 / annual provider fee
[10:17] Geri Kuhn: Agreeed Soro.
[10:17] Rose Springvale: Julynn, from the attendees side? or the provider?
[10:17] Cat Galileo: i would be happy to recoup that, and $25 is reasonable price in California
[10:17] Lexis Looming: For my 2 cents I would like to add that you won't find very many opportunities to get CLE credit for
$25. and the person who does the work to obtain approval has a right to be reimbursed for time
[10:17] Legal Writer: Thank you, Cat, for fronting this expense.
[10:18] Legal Writer: $25 is very cheap for CLE
[10:18] Julynn Lilliehook: Any attendee can send in the course documents and teh cle will be approved for EVERYONE else
[10:18] Cat Galileo: In addition for CA requirements I am committing to maintain your records for 4 years in case of audits
[10:18] Julynn Lilliehook: I have done thin before
[10:18] Cat Galileo: If you attend, for free, you will receive the handouts
[10:18] Rose Springvale: what jurisdiction?
[10:18] Julynn Lilliehook: WI
[10:18] Cat Galileo: all you will not receive is the California certificate
[10:18] Cat Galileo: so do as you wish
[10:18] Julynn Lilliehook: but not the attendance certificate?
[10:19] Cat Galileo: correct, that is what I am charging $25 for, to recoup my costs.
[10:19] Lexis Looming: Are you volunteering jULYNN to take over getting CLE approval for us for free?
[10:19] Julynn Lilliehook: In Wisconsin, yes
[10:20] Julynn Lilliehook: IF I may just say one thing more...
[10:20] Didier Doflug: also, after a first approval in a jurisdiction, it should be that much easier to get it again
[10:20] Cat Galileo: if you want to do that, that is just fine, you will receive all the documents except the CALIFORNIA
certificate. have at it
[10:21] Legal Writer: Thanks for looking into this, Julynn.
[10:21] Julynn Lilliehook: I have often taken CLE from outside my jurisdiction and then had it approved as CLE for WI....So
I don't need to have every CLE I take pre-approved for WI.
[10:21] Didier Doflug: not sure if it applies to anyone other than myself and Ed Castronova, but I'll seek approval in
Indiana
[10:21] Legal Writer: Thanks.
[10:21] Lexis Looming: Thank you Julynn. that is quite generous ofv you. I look forward to seeing our CLE accredited in at
least 2 states now each time
[10:21] Legal Writer: Any other comments about this?
[10:21] Julynn Lilliehook: But I cannot get it approved uuntil AFTER I attend the course
[10:21] Legal Writer: That is commonly the case.
[10:22] Legal Writer: Cat, can you please give a preview of Ben's talk?
[10:22] Julynn Lilliehook: Look, I am the obnly Wiscinsin lawyer I know on SL
[10:22] Cat Galileo: Ben will be discussing ethics of practice in Virtual Worlds, including a discussion of the model rules
of ethics
[10:22] Cat Galileo: ah here he is himself
[10:22] Cat Galileo: this will start at noon
[10:23] Lexis Looming: How can we advertise it will get Wisconsin approval in advance if u have to wait until you attend to
find out if it will be approved?
[10:23] Legal Writer: Will he speak about unauthroized practice of law?
[10:23] Cat Galileo: that is one of the topics, yes
[10:23] Julynn Lilliehook: Advertise?
[10:23] Legal Writer: I think it's commonly stated that CLE is "being sought"
[10:23] Legal Writer: for specific states.
[10:24] Cat Galileo: Perhaps we can discuss multijurisdictional CLE on the forums or in a sub-group. We do have other
agenda items :)
[10:24] Legal Writer: Yes, we do, so let's thank Cat for the update.
[10:24] Cat Galileo: if you have some urge to register and pay for today's session, poster farthest to the right has the
link :) again, free to attend, $25 certifcate.
[10:25] Cat Galileo: thanks everyone.
[10:25] Legal Writer: Thanks, Cat.
[10:25] Lexis Looming: Thank You Cat
[10:25] Legal Writer: OK, the next item of business is credential checking.
[10:25] Legal Writer: Lexis, can you please say a few words about the status of that?
[10:25] Lexis Looming: Sorry To say not too much has happened with credentialing this month. We are still working on
statements for your profiles as well as for our Web site. Drafts are posted in the forums and we can use your comments.
[10:26] Legal Writer: Geri mentioned she has the box for payment so that is ready to go.
[10:26] Legal Writer: Thank you, Lexis.
[10:26] Julynn Lilliehook: I paid for verification...how can I check if someone did that yert?
[10:26] Geri Kuhn: I have it recorded, Julynn
[10:26] Lexis Looming: Who did you pay?
[10:26] Lexis Looming: ok
[10:26] Judson Cortes is Offline
[10:26] Julynn Lilliehook: Thje box
[10:27] Legal Writer: Can we say that if there are no comments on the workding of the credentialing items in the next two
weeks, we will go with that?
[10:27] Lexis Looming: I have not received your application
[10:27] Julynn Lilliehook: there's an application?
[10:27] Geri Kuhn: As far as I know, we haven't started with the application process Lexis.
[10:27] Julynn Lilliehook: good grief
[10:28] Lexis Looming: That is correct Legal. The form of the application has been approved
[10:28] Lexis Looming: The fee has been approved
[10:28] Legal Writer: OK, it sounds like we should have a forum post about the current status an process, and an
announcement to the members about its availability.
[10:28] Legal Writer: Does that make sense?
[10:28] Lexis Looming: The language to describe the credentials has not been approved
[10:28] Legal Writer: Right, so we should get Lexis comments on that.
[10:29] Legal Writer: Can people chime in during the next 2 weeks?
[10:29] Legal Writer: Not hearing any objection, let's say that please get in your comments during the next two weeks, and
then we'll go with what we have at that point.
[10:29] Legal Writer: Thank you, Lexis for leading the effort on this!
[10:30] Legal Writer: Ok, the next item of business is the careers fair.
[10:30] Legal Writer: Does anyone have further thoughts about the career fair or anything to report?
[10:31] Legal Writer: I am sorry that Solomon is not here to lead us a little on this point.
[10:31] Legal Writer: If we don't have a report, let's table the discussion on that until next time.
[10:31] Legal Writer: Any questions or comments at this point in the meeting?
[10:32] Legal Writer: OK, the next item of business is the social event.
[10:32] Legal Writer: Geri, would you mind please presenting on that?
[10:32] Geri Kuhn: Srue
[10:32] Legal Writer: And Cat, please feel free to add in your thoughts.
[10:33] Geri Kuhn: We would like to plan a holiday party.
[10:33] Geri Kuhn: Similar to last year.
[10:33] Geri Kuhn: I think people enjoyed it and it was well attended.
[10:33] Jai Baxter: Legalk, solomn, can i just offer when the career fair comes up to help with law firm contacts?/ (sorry
slow to keyboard :D)?
[10:33] Ashcroft Burnham: Will there be cake?
[10:34] Legal Writer: Yes, thanks, Jai.
[10:34] Geri Kuhn smiles.
[10:34] Cat Galileo: cake!
[10:34] Queen Coronet looks down at her grumbling tummy
[10:34] Geri Kuhn: Can you bring it Ashcroft?
[10:34] Ashcroft Burnham: Can't have a Christmas party without cake.
[10:34] Cat Galileo: last year henri found us a lovely spot
[10:34] Ashcroft Burnham: Hmm, I could if I had time... there's a lovely cake shop in Caledon...
[10:34] Geri Kuhn: He sure did. I will ask him if it is availavble this year again.
[10:34] Legal Writer: Any thought as to date and time?
[10:34] Ashcroft Burnham: I'm sure that they'd have Christmas cake :-)
[10:34] Cat Galileo: Caledon at Christmas, that sounds like it would be fun
[10:35] Rose Springvale: you want volunteers for a social event or brainstorming Cat?
[10:35] Lexis Looming: Yes and Henri brough wonderful fireworks too
[10:35] Geri Kuhn: If anyone is interested in heloping plan the party, please contact me or CAt.
[10:35] Geri Kuhn: Yes, Rose!
[10:35] Rose Springvale raises hand. I"ll be glad to help !
[10:36] Geri Kuhn: Excellent . Okay we will post further developments inthe forum.
[10:36] Didier Doflug: Although Second Life is the current dominant platform, it may not always be...should this
association consider a rebranding to the "Virtual World Bar Association" to better set itself up for the future?
[10:36] Legal Writer: Any thought about date and time?
[10:36] Cat Galileo: we have a forum dedicated to this project at slba.info forums
[10:36] Legal Writer: Didier, I think you can post about your idea in the forum on strategic planning.
[10:36] Lexis Looming: Will there also be a general meeting in December or will the party replace it?
[10:36] Didier Doflug: ok, will do
[10:37] Ashcroft Burnham: Or "Metaverse Bar Association?"
[10:37] Julynn Lilliehook: Ach!
[10:37] Geri Kuhn: I guess we will have to decide that Lexis.
[10:37] Geri Kuhn: What do people think?
[10:37] Rose Springvale: hmm, maybe we should stay SL... I"m in both texas and ABA after all
[10:37] Lexis Looming: I think last year we had no meeting in December, just the party
[10:38] Legal Writer: We could have a short meeting, and then adjourn to celebrations!
[10:38] Ashcroft Burnham wonders whether there should be a catering/cake subcommittee for the party...
[10:38] Jayson Watkin: I think we should stay SL, and not metaverse or VW
[10:38] Benjamin Noble: That is correct, re December.
[10:38] Ashcroft Burnham: Hmm, the "Volkswagen Bar Association"... ;-)
[10:38] Captain Netizen: The association's name should reflect the "location" where the members practise?
[10:38] Geri Kuhn: Sounds like a good idea Lexis, Legal.
[10:38] Cat Galileo: we JUST rebranded as SL Bar Assn :) I'd be interested in an umbrella VWBA group perhaps.
[10:38] Rose Springvale: would rather just have a party and no meeting
[10:39] Rose Springvale: :)
[10:39] Geri Kuhn smiles .
[10:39] Rose Springvale: i know taht surprises everyone lol
[10:39] Jai Baxter chuckles
[10:39] Cat Galileo: :)
[10:39] Lexis Looming smiles
[10:39] Legal Writer: Is everyone OK with having the December meeting's regular time become our party time?
[10:39] Lexis Looming: I am with Rose
[10:39] Avid Inglewood: Agrees with jayson - with the exception of the possibility that in the future SLBA may be able to
expand its reach into new emerging virtual worlds
[10:40] Rose Springvale: want a motion?
[10:40] Didier Doflug: there will at least need to be an update on the Credential checking
[10:40] Legal Writer: We can have a short update at the beginning.
[10:40] Lexis Looming: Ok
[10:40] Legal Writer: Anyone have a motion?
[10:40] Didier Doflug: i move we set short meeting before party, but wear your holiday best
[10:40] Ashcroft Burnham: I move that we have more cake at meetings.
[10:41] Benjamin Noble: Second Didier.
[10:41] Lexis Looming: I move our December business meeting be no longer than 15 minutes and the remaining time be used for
party and cake
[10:41] Avid Inglewood: point of order
[10:41] Legal Writer: Didier, are you ok with Lexis' amendment?
[10:41] Rose Springvale grumbles that she doesnt' type fast enough to dispense with meeting
[10:41] Legal Writer: of your motion?
[10:41] Benjamin Noble: Second Didier as amended by Lexis, if amendment is acceptable to Lexis.
[10:41] Didier Doflug: absolutely
[10:41] Lexis Looming: so accepted
[10:42] Legal Writer: OK, any further discussion of the motion?
[10:42] Sam4 Courtois: Please restate
[10:42] Legal Writer: OK, the motion is to have the Dec. business meeting be no longer than 15 minutes, and the remaining
time be used for party and cake.
[10:42] Legal Writer: Further discussion?
[10:42] Jai Baxter: heh now that's rules of order at work -the Party &Cake Railroad :D well done
[10:43] Benjamin Noble laughs.
[10:43] Lexis Looming: hussshhhhhh
[10:43] Legal Writer: OK, hearing no further discussion, all those in favor say "aye."
[10:43] Sam4 Courtois: aye
[10:43] Ashcroft Burnham: Aye
[10:43] Geri Kuhn: Aye
[10:43] Didier Doflug: aye
[10:43] Lexis Looming: aye
[10:43] Benjamin Noble: Aye for cake.
[10:43] Julynn Lilliehook feels like she is surrounded by 6th graders
[10:43] Morgandy Muircastle: aye
[10:43] Avid Inglewood: I am not sure a motion would actually be necessary on how long the meeting should be
[10:43] Legal Writer: Aye aye.
[10:43] Captain Netizen: sounds OK, "unless there's an urgent issue"
[10:44] Legal Writer: All those opposed say "nay."
[10:44] Avid Inglewood: which is why there should not be a time liimit
[10:44] Avid Inglewood: nay
[10:44] Legal Writer: Any abstentions?
[10:44] Captain Netizen: Abstain
[10:44] Julynn Lilliehook: abstain
[10:44] Jayson Watkin: abstain
[10:44] Soro Dagostino: abstain
[10:44] Legal Writer: OK, I believe the motion carried.
[10:45] Ashcroft Burnham claps.
[10:45] Legal Writer: Thanks, Geri!
[10:45] Lexis Looming: I never knew cake could be so controversial Ashcroft
[10:45] Geri Kuhn: Rose Ashcroft and Cat, we will be in touch
[10:45] Lexis Looming: Thank you Geri
[10:45] Cat Galileo: great
[10:45] Rose Springvale: great :)
[10:45] Geri Kuhn: Looking forward to it
[10:45] Captain Netizen: If there is an urgent issue, i guess we can rescind the time limit
[10:45] Julynn Lilliehook: not without a motion!
[10:45] Rose Springvale: we can always call special meetings for urgent things
[10:45] Legal Writer: Right, we are flexible.
[10:46] Soro Dagostino: Id like this group to discuss the OS issue -- forum mayhap?
[10:46] Didier Doflug: i'll take my point to the Strategic planning forum
[10:46] Jayson Watkin: openspace or open sim?
[10:46] Benjamin Noble: I'd like to thank Legal Writer for stepping up and chairing this a couple of months before he is to
take over, in Solomon's absence.
[10:46] Legal Writer: You are welcome.
[10:47] Soro Dagostino: Open space and open sym
[10:47] Morgandy Muircastle: Operating System?
[10:47] Legal Writer: Soro, do you want to say a few words up here?
[10:47] Lexis Looming: Thank You Legal
[10:47] Soro Dagostino: No, SL changes to OS lands.
[10:47] Soro Dagostino: No, I'll open it in the forums.
[10:47] Legal Writer: OK, cool.
[10:47] Avid Inglewood: If I may - - -
[10:47] Legal Writer: Yes, Avid?
[10:48] Avid Inglewood: After hearing much talk about the OS issue
[10:48] Avid Inglewood: one thing has become painfully clear
[10:48] Avid Inglewood: there seems to be very little understanding of the root cause of this whole issue
[10:48] Avid Inglewood: it is technical and it is costly
[10:49] Legal Writer: Right.
[10:49] Soro Dagostino: And grieving to those who believed.
[10:49] Legal Writer: Avid, does it make sense to write something up with Soro for the forum?
[10:49] Legal Writer: To discuss this issue?
[10:50] Jayson Watkin: Soro, are you saying there's a legal issue to discuss with openspace or solely a business one?
[10:50] Avid Inglewood: what we need it to approach this issue, educated with the facts in order to be able to reason on a
equitable compromise
[10:50] Didier Doflug: yes, it would be helpful to provide some background so we're all on the same page
[10:50] Lexis Looming: I agree Avid....and it brings home that SL is a commercial enterprise owned by LL not by the
residents. We all hold nothing more than a mere license to anything we did not create here ourselves
[10:50] Soro Dagostino: If there were any laws, there might be a legal issue.
[10:50] Jayson Watkin: there is always the law
[10:50] Ashcroft Burnham: There are laws.
[10:50] Soro Dagostino: I guess that is the issue.
[10:51] Ashcroft Burnham: Just none that force any company to provide any service at a lower price than it is prepared to
do so :-)
[10:51] Julynn Lilliehook: Buy Ben's Book
[10:51] Soro Dagostino: I have it.
[10:51] Legal Writer: Does anyone feel that LL's conduct rises to the level of an unfair and deceptive trade practice?
[10:51] Soro Dagostino: Yes
[10:51] Benjamin Noble: One note, before we go too far here.
[10:51] Julynn Lilliehook: No
[10:51] Jayson Watkin: maybe
[10:51] Benjamin Noble: The organization has been fairly careful not to take formal legal positions on specific issues.
[10:51] Lexis Looming: unfair to whom?
[10:51] Lorelei Junot is Offline
[10:51] Soro Dagostino: Typical gathering of lawyers.
[10:51] Legal Writer: Consumers.
[10:51] Benjamin Noble: Because members may disagree, and because we have to be careful not to give legal advice.
[10:52] Benjamin Noble: (Which I'll cover in the upcoming presentation, actually).
[10:52] Julynn Lilliehook: Like consumers of imaginaery cake?
[10:52] Avid Inglewood: again - without jumping to conclusions - LL has proposed actin and offered forums for comments on
their proposal.
[10:52] Lexis Looming: Don't sellers get to set the price of their goods/services and consumers merely decide whether to
buy?
[10:52] Julynn Lilliehook: Play at your own risk.
[10:52] Captain Netizen: Consumers of the service in question, ie use of SL
[10:52] Soro Dagostino: As I said, it is a subject for the forums.
[10:52] Jayson Watkin: my two quick cents, yes the pricing may change, but the proposed limitiations on land use is a bit
of a switch
[10:53] Avid Inglewood: smart money is on a counter proposal to LL that both addresses the needs of LL without compromising
the wishes of OS residence.
[10:53] Julynn Lilliehook: And this is free
[10:53] Legal Writer: Is this a discussion that perhaps should take place on the forums?
[10:53] Avid Inglewood: and BTY - open space properties, by the very defination provided by LL on the expected use of OS is
very clear.
[10:54] Soro Dagostino: Hmmmm, sure they did.
[10:54] Soro Dagostino: Now.
[10:54] Jayson Watkin: and you really can't play the LL didn't expect people to use things in a way they didn't imagine
card, that's what SL is about
[10:54] Lexis Looming: It was always clear...They have changed the rules on transferability however
[10:55] Jayson Watkin: and working on changing the rules on use
[10:55] Benjamin Noble: Would, perhaps, we want to consider a panel discussion open to the public addressing the legal
issues?
[10:55] Avid Inglewood: now? - how long has the description of OS been on their website under the "Land" tab? ( I do not
have the answer to this)
[10:55] Legal Writer: Ben, that's a great idea.
[10:55] Benjamin Noble: There are obviously different viewpoints, and as was observed, little real knowledge out there.
[10:56] Legal Writer: I think it would be nice to have a background document to explain the issues.
[10:56] Benjamin Noble: How about the people most interested hash out a proposal in the forums?
[10:56] Legal Writer: Sounds good.
[10:56] Avid Inglewood: as for playing the LL didnt expect card ... this is a matter of stated expected use versus actual
use
[10:56] Lexis Looming: I read it there at least several months ago Avid when a friend started buying up OS spaces and I
wondered =how they could be so cheap...at least 6 months ago I am sure
[10:57] Legal Writer: I also do not want to overrun Ben's CLE time.
[10:57] Benjamin Noble: I hate to do this, but I have to start the presentation... yeah, thanks, Legal. And I need to do a
mic check first.
[10:57] Legal Writer: So, can we adjourn the meeting now to allow Ben to set up his CLE?
[10:57] Benjamin Noble: Hope some of you stick around.
[10:57] Lexis Looming: Move to adjourn
[10:57] Geri Kuhn: It starts at noon, right?
[10:57] Didier Doflug: second
[10:57] Legal Writer: All in favor of adjourning?
[10:57] Cat Galileo: one sec
[10:57] Lexis Looming: aye
[10:57] Rose Springvale: aye
[10:57] Jayson Watkin: aye
[10:57] Soro Dagostino: aye
[10:57] Julynn Lilliehook: aye already
[10:57] Jai Baxter: :)
[10:58] Benjamin Noble: aye
[10:58] Legal Writer: Aye
[10:58] Cat Galileo: We usually make sure to note at beginning that transcript will be posted
[10:58] Legal Writer: So noted.
[10:58] Legal Writer: Any opposed?
[10:58] Cat Galileo: since we did not, anyone who wants their part taken out please let me know.
[10:58] Lexis Looming: Nunc pro tunc
[10:58] Ashcroft Burnham: Aye :-)
[10:58] Rose Springvale: Thanks for a great meeting
[10:58] Legal Writer: OK, meeting is adjourned.
[10:58] Legal Writer: Thank you everyone for attending and participating.
Created on ... Nov. 8, 2008