It's mostly cribbed from other coworking spaces' agreements. I think
it's Indy Hall's plus perhaps one other, I forget which.
If anyone out there would like to give it a once-over and let me know
if anything looks amiss, it would be very much appreciated! We'll be
printing out a bunch of these later today in advance of an event for
New Work City tonight.
Barring any last minute problems, it looks like we are on the verge of
a deal. I'll keep you posted!
> If anyone out there would like to give it a once-over and let me know > if anything looks amiss, it would be very much appreciated! We'll be > printing out a bunch of these later today in advance of an event for > New Work City tonight.
I am always amazed at these clauses:
Non-Disparagement. You shall, during and after the participation in and use of the Services, refrain from making any statements or comments of a defamatory or disparaging nature to any third party regarding NEW WORK CITY, or any of NEW WORK CITY's officers, directors, employees, personnel, agents, policies, services or products, other than to comply with law.
I only ever see them from US companies. I happen to think that clause contradicts the coworking 'values'. This is a gag clause, nothing less than that.
Just my 2 cents.
-- Steven Heath Director Foxbane Consulting www.foxbane.co.nz Cell: +64 21 706-067
> statements or comments of a defamatory or disparaging nature to any
> third party regarding NEW
Yeah, we based our contract on IH too (thanks Alex!) but took out
"disparaging" after the first round of signings, "defamation" is one
thing but with "disparaging" in there it looks like we don't want to
be critiqued either.
Btw, if anyone opens up a space in Canada, our version has a couple of
local tweaks so feel free to ask for the file.
Agreed all around. So should we simply removed the "disparaging" or get rid of the clause altogether? Is it important to have protection against defamation?
Also, since the space isn't open yet, we'll be adding stipulations that membership won't start until after the space is open, and that the space will open within a certain range of dates or the agreement is null and void.
Anything else?
On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 8:27 AM, patrick.tang...@gmail.com <
> > statements or comments of a defamatory or disparaging nature to any > > third party regarding NEW
> Yeah, we based our contract on IH too (thanks Alex!) but took out > "disparaging" after the first round of signings, "defamation" is one > thing but with "disparaging" in there it looks like we don't want to > be critiqued either.
> Btw, if anyone opens up a space in Canada, our version has a couple of > local tweaks so feel free to ask for the file.
To the many of you who've worked from our agreement: Ours was taken from a very generic "shared space" agreement that I found somewhere on the web. We needed something FAST, so we slightly modded the TOS that I'd found and worked from there.
It's been my desire for over a year now to tone down that agreement, it's got a lot of garbage and legalese in it.
If anyone is interested in working with Geoff and myself, as well as if anyone has any legal resources that could chip in, I'd love to work together to create an open source coworking agreement that covers what really needs to be covered, and cuts out all of the other crap.
> Agreed all around. So should we simply removed the "disparaging" or get rid > of the clause altogether? Is it important to have protection against > defamation?
> Also, since the space isn't open yet, we'll be adding stipulations that > membership won't start until after the space is open, and that the space > will open within a certain range of dates or the agreement is null and void.
> Anything else?
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 8:27 AM, patrick.tang...@gmail.com < > patrick.tang...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > statements or comments of a defamatory or disparaging nature to any >> > third party regarding NEW
>> Yeah, we based our contract on IH too (thanks Alex!) but took out >> "disparaging" after the first round of signings, "defamation" is one >> thing but with "disparaging" in there it looks like we don't want to >> be critiqued either.
>> Btw, if anyone opens up a space in Canada, our version has a couple of >> local tweaks so feel free to ask for the file.
> To the many of you who've worked from our agreement: > Ours was taken from a very generic "shared space" agreement that I > found > somewhere on the web. We needed something FAST, so we slightly > modded the > TOS that I'd found and worked from there.
> It's been my desire for over a year now to tone down that agreement, > it's > got a lot of garbage and legalese in it.
> If anyone is interested in working with Geoff and myself, as well as > if > anyone has any legal resources that could chip in, I'd love to work > together > to create an open source coworking agreement that covers what really > needs > to be covered, and cuts out all of the other crap.
I would love the opportunity to work with you on this. Our agreement was crafted after a few spots and I modified it heavily myself.
-- Daniel E. Shipton Founder, Impromptu Studio President & Founder, Redship Technologies Office: (515) 868-0060 Cell: (515) 460-3618
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 10:58 AM, Tony Bacigalupo > <tonybacigal...@gmail.com>wrote:
>> Agreed all around. So should we simply removed the "disparaging" or >> get rid >> of the clause altogether? Is it important to have protection against >> defamation?
>> Also, since the space isn't open yet, we'll be adding stipulations >> that >> membership won't start until after the space is open, and that the >> space >> will open within a certain range of dates or the agreement is null >> and void.
>> Anything else?
>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 8:27 AM, patrick.tang...@gmail.com < >> patrick.tang...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> statements or comments of a defamatory or disparaging nature to any >>>> third party regarding NEW
>>> Yeah, we based our contract on IH too (thanks Alex!) but took out >>> "disparaging" after the first round of signings, "defamation" is one >>> thing but with "disparaging" in there it looks like we don't want to >>> be critiqued either.
>>> Btw, if anyone opens up a space in Canada, our version has a >>> couple of >>> local tweaks so feel free to ask for the file.
> To the many of you who've worked from our agreement:
> Ours was taken from a very generic "shared space" agreement that I found
> somewhere on the web. We needed something FAST, so we slightly modded the
> TOS that I'd found and worked from there.
> It's been my desire for over a year now to tone down that agreement, it's
> got a lot of garbage and legalese in it.
> If anyone is interested in working with Geoff and myself, as well as if
> anyone has any legal resources that could chip in, I'd love to work together
> to create an open source coworking agreement that covers what really needs
> to be covered, and cuts out all of the other crap.
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 10:58 AM, Tony Bacigalupo
> <tonybacigal...@gmail.com>wrote:
> > Agreed all around. So should we simply removed the "disparaging" or get rid
> > of the clause altogether? Is it important to have protection against
> > defamation?
> > Also, since the space isn't open yet, we'll be adding stipulations that
> > membership won't start until after the space is open, and that the space
> > will open within a certain range of dates or the agreement is null and void.
> > Anything else?
> > On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 8:27 AM, patrick.tang...@gmail.com <
> > patrick.tang...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > statements or comments of a defamatory or disparaging nature to any
> >> > third party regarding NEW
> >> Yeah, we based our contract on IH too (thanks Alex!) but took out
> >> "disparaging" after the first round of signings, "defamation" is one
> >> thing but with "disparaging" in there it looks like we don't want to
> >> be critiqued either.
> >> Btw, if anyone opens up a space in Canada, our version has a couple of
> >> local tweaks so feel free to ask for the file.
I'd be interested in helping review/edit/publish. Do we have any leads on legal resources available? Does a creative commons license or gnu fdl license make sense for everyone?
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
On Sep 26, 10:01 am, "Alex Hillman" <dangerouslyawes...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> To the many of you who've worked from our agreement:
> Ours was taken from a very generic "shared space" agreement that I found
> somewhere on the web. We needed something FAST, so we slightly modded the
> TOS that I'd found and worked from there.
> It's been my desire for over a year now to tone down that agreement, it's
> got a lot of garbage and legalese in it.
> If anyone is interested in working with Geoff and myself, as well as if
> anyone has any legal resources that could chip in, I'd love to work together
> to create an open source coworking agreement that covers what really needs
> to be covered, and cuts out all of the other crap.
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 10:58 AM, Tony Bacigalupo
> <tonybacigal...@gmail.com>wrote:
> > Agreed all around. So should we simply removed the "disparaging" or get rid
> > of the clause altogether? Is it important to have protection against
> > defamation?
> > Also, since the space isn't open yet, we'll be adding stipulations that
> > membership won't start until after the space is open, and that the space
> > will open within a certain range of dates or the agreement is null and void.
> > Anything else?
> > On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 8:27 AM, patrick.tang...@gmail.com <
> > patrick.tang...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > statements or comments of a defamatory or disparaging nature to any
> >> > third party regarding NEW
> >> Yeah, we based our contract on IH too (thanks Alex!) but took out
> >> "disparaging" after the first round of signings, "defamation" is one
> >> thing but with "disparaging" in there it looks like we don't want to
> >> be critiqued either.
> >> Btw, if anyone opens up a space in Canada, our version has a couple of
> >> local tweaks so feel free to ask for the file.
A little late to the discussion but I am happy to share the coworking
component of our contract and I do have
connections to legal resources should we need. Cubes & Crayons
agreement was created by a lawyer and
protects us from liability and protects our clients. We don't have a
defamation clause.
All the best,
Felicity
Space: www.cubesandcrayons.com Blog: cubes.typepad.com/blog
Personal blog: cubes.typepad.com/cake
> I'd be interested in helping review/edit/publish. Do we have any leads on legal resources available? Does a creative commons license or gnu fdl license make sense for everyone?
> Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
> Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 21:03:50
> To: Coworking<coworking@googlegroups.com>
> Subject: [Coworking] Re: New Work City membership agreement - version 1
> I'd be very interested in helping to create an open source universal
> coworking agreement.
> On Sep 26, 10:01 am, "Alex Hillman" <dangerouslyawes...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > To the many of you who've worked from our agreement:
> > Ours was taken from a very generic "shared space" agreement that I found
> > somewhere on the web. We needed something FAST, so we slightly modded the
> > TOS that I'd found and worked from there.
> > It's been my desire for over a year now to tone down that agreement, it's
> > got a lot of garbage and legalese in it.
> > If anyone is interested in working with Geoff and myself, as well as if
> > anyone has any legal resources that could chip in, I'd love to work together
> > to create an open source coworking agreement that covers what really needs
> > to be covered, and cuts out all of the other crap.
> > On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 10:58 AM, Tony Bacigalupo
> > <tonybacigal...@gmail.com>wrote:
> > > Agreed all around. So should we simply removed the "disparaging" or get rid
> > > of the clause altogether? Is it important to have protection against
> > > defamation?
> > > Also, since the space isn't open yet, we'll be adding stipulations that
> > > membership won't start until after the space is open, and that the space
> > > will open within a certain range of dates or the agreement is null and void.
> > > Anything else?
> > > On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 8:27 AM, patrick.tang...@gmail.com <
> > > patrick.tang...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> > statements or comments of a defamatory or disparaging nature to any
> > >> > third party regarding NEW
> > >> Yeah, we based our contract on IH too (thanks Alex!) but took out
> > >> "disparaging" after the first round of signings, "defamation" is one
> > >> thing but with "disparaging" in there it looks like we don't want to
> > >> be critiqued either.
> > >> Btw, if anyone opens up a space in Canada, our version has a couple of
> > >> local tweaks so feel free to ask for the file.
-----Original Message-----
From: felicity at cubes <felicity.chap...@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2008 10:24:11 To: Coworking<coworking@googlegroups.com>
Subject: [Coworking] Re: New Work City membership agreement - version 1
A little late to the discussion but I am happy to share the coworking
component of our contract and I do have
connections to legal resources should we need. Cubes & Crayons
agreement was created by a lawyer and
protects us from liability and protects our clients. We don't have a
defamation clause.
All the best,
Felicity
Space: www.cubesandcrayons.com Blog: cubes.typepad.com/blog
Personal blog: cubes.typepad.com/cake
On Sep 26, 9:15 pm, dko...@gmail.com wrote:
> I'd be interested in helping review/edit/publish. Do we have any leads on legal resources available? Does a creative commons license or gnu fdl license make sense for everyone?
> Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
> Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 21:03:50
> To: Coworking<coworking@googlegroups.com>
> Subject: [Coworking] Re: New Work City membership agreement - version 1
> I'd be very interested in helping to create an open source universal
> coworking agreement.
> On Sep 26, 10:01 am, "Alex Hillman" <dangerouslyawes...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > To the many of you who've worked from our agreement:
> > Ours was taken from a very generic "shared space" agreement that I found
> > somewhere on the web. We needed something FAST, so we slightly modded the
> > TOS that I'd found and worked from there.
> > It's been my desire for over a year now to tone down that agreement, it's
> > got a lot of garbage and legalese in it.
> > If anyone is interested in working with Geoff and myself, as well as if
> > anyone has any legal resources that could chip in, I'd love to work together
> > to create an open source coworking agreement that covers what really needs
> > to be covered, and cuts out all of the other crap.
> > On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 10:58 AM, Tony Bacigalupo
> > <tonybacigal...@gmail.com>wrote:
> > > Agreed all around. So should we simply removed the "disparaging" or get rid
> > > of the clause altogether? Is it important to have protection against
> > > defamation?
> > > Also, since the space isn't open yet, we'll be adding stipulations that
> > > membership won't start until after the space is open, and that the space
> > > will open within a certain range of dates or the agreement is null and void.
> > > Anything else?
> > > On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 8:27 AM, patrick.tang...@gmail.com <
> > > patrick.tang...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> > statements or comments of a defamatory or disparaging nature to any
> > >> > third party regarding NEW
> > >> Yeah, we based our contract on IH too (thanks Alex!) but took out
> > >> "disparaging" after the first round of signings, "defamation" is one
> > >> thing but with "disparaging" in there it looks like we don't want to
> > >> be critiqued either.
> > >> Btw, if anyone opens up a space in Canada, our version has a couple of
> > >> local tweaks so feel free to ask for the file.
I'd like to help create an open source working agreement. Although
I'm not a lawyer, I've worked for lawyers in relevant fields, and have
written employment, partnership, client and outsourcing contracts
which have been greenlighted by some of the best lawyers. I'm great
at writing really plain-language, simple, direct, easy-to-read
contracts.
What's the next step?
-Alex
Alex Linsker
(646) 269-4915
alexlins...@gmail.com
www.alexlinsker.com Organizational democracy: helping people work together in companies
On Sep 26, 11:01 am, "Alex Hillman" <dangerouslyawes...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> To the many of you who've worked from our agreement:
> Ours was taken from a very generic "shared space" agreement that I found
> somewhere on the web. We needed something FAST, so we slightly modded the
> TOS that I'd found and worked from there.
> It's been my desire for over a year now to tone down that agreement, it's
> got a lot of garbage and legalese in it.
> If anyone is interested in working with Geoff and myself, as well as if
> anyone has any legal resources that could chip in, I'd love to work together
> to create an open source coworking agreement that covers what really needs
> to be covered, and cuts out all of the other crap.
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 10:58 AM, Tony Bacigalupo
> <tonybacigal...@gmail.com>wrote:
> > Agreed all around. So should we simply removed the "disparaging" or get rid
> > of the clause altogether? Is it important to have protection against
> > defamation?
> > Also, since the space isn't open yet, we'll be adding stipulations that
> > membership won't start until after the space is open, and that the space
> > will open within a certain range of dates or the agreement is null and void.
> > Anything else?
> > On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 8:27 AM, patrick.tang...@gmail.com <
> > patrick.tang...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > statements or comments of a defamatory or disparaging nature to any
> >> > third party regarding NEW
> >> Yeah, we based our contract on IH too (thanks Alex!) but took out
> >> "disparaging" after the first round of signings, "defamation" is one
> >> thing but with "disparaging" in there it looks like we don't want to
> >> be critiqued either.
> >> Btw, if anyone opens up a space in Canada, our version has a couple of
> >> local tweaks so feel free to ask for the file.
> >> Patrick
> >> station-c.com- Hide quoted text -
An open source working agreement would be GREAT.
I don't know how much I can contribute (legally), but would love to see one
created and will provide ideas the best I can.
-----Original Message-----
From: coworking@googlegroups.com [mailto:coworking@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of Alex Linsker
Sent: Monday, September 29, 2008 5:04 AM
To: Coworking
Subject: [Coworking] Re: New Work City membership agreement - version 1
Hi Alex,
I'd like to help create an open source working agreement. Although I'm not
a lawyer, I've worked for lawyers in relevant fields, and have written
employment, partnership, client and outsourcing contracts which have been
greenlighted by some of the best lawyers. I'm great at writing really
plain-language, simple, direct, easy-to-read contracts.
What's the next step?
-Alex
Alex Linsker
(646) 269-4915
alexlins...@gmail.com
www.alexlinsker.com Organizational democracy: helping people work together in companies
On Sep 26, 11:01 am, "Alex Hillman" <dangerouslyawes...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> To the many of you who've worked from our agreement:
> Ours was taken from a very generic "shared space" agreement that I > found somewhere on the web. We needed something FAST, so we slightly > modded the TOS that I'd found and worked from there.
> It's been my desire for over a year now to tone down that agreement, > it's got a lot of garbage and legalese in it.
> If anyone is interested in working with Geoff and myself, as well as > if anyone has any legal resources that could chip in, I'd love to work > together to create an open source coworking agreement that covers what > really needs to be covered, and cuts out all of the other crap.
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 10:58 AM, Tony Bacigalupo
> <tonybacigal...@gmail.com>wrote:
> > Agreed all around. So should we simply removed the "disparaging" or > > get rid of the clause altogether? Is it important to have protection > > against defamation?
> > Also, since the space isn't open yet, we'll be adding stipulations > > that membership won't start until after the space is open, and that > > the space will open within a certain range of dates or the agreement is
null and void.
> > Anything else?
> > On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 8:27 AM, patrick.tang...@gmail.com < > > patrick.tang...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > statements or comments of a defamatory or disparaging nature to > >> > any third party regarding NEW
> >> Yeah, we based our contract on IH too (thanks Alex!) but took out > >> "disparaging" after the first round of signings, "defamation" is > >> one thing but with "disparaging" in there it looks like we don't > >> want to be critiqued either.
> >> Btw, if anyone opens up a space in Canada, our version has a couple > >> of local tweaks so feel free to ask for the file.
> >> Patrick
> >> station-c.com- Hide quoted text -
> An open source working agreement would be GREAT.
> I don't know how much I can contribute (legally), but would love to see one
> created and will provide ideas the best I can.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: coworking@googlegroups.com [mailto:coworking@googlegroups.com] On
> Behalf Of Alex Linsker
> Sent: Monday, September 29, 2008 5:04 AM
> To: Coworking
> Subject: [Coworking] Re: New Work City membership agreement - version 1
> Hi Alex,
> I'd like to help create an open source working agreement. Although I'm not
> a lawyer, I've worked for lawyers in relevant fields, and have written
> employment, partnership, client and outsourcing contracts which have been
> greenlighted by some of the best lawyers. I'm great at writing really
> plain-language, simple, direct, easy-to-read contracts.
> What's the next step?
> -Alex
> Alex Linsker
> (646) 269-4915
> alexlins...@gmail.comwww.alexlinsker.com > Organizational democracy: helping people work together in companies
> On Sep 26, 11:01 am, "Alex Hillman" <dangerouslyawes...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > To the many of you who've worked from our agreement:
> > Ours was taken from a very generic "shared space" agreement that I
> > found somewhere on the web. We needed something FAST, so we slightly
> > modded the TOS that I'd found and worked from there.
> > It's been my desire for over a year now to tone down that agreement,
> > it's got a lot of garbage and legalese in it.
> > If anyone is interested in working with Geoff and myself, as well as
> > if anyone has any legal resources that could chip in, I'd love to work
> > together to create an open source coworking agreement that covers what
> > really needs to be covered, and cuts out all of the other crap.
> > On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 10:58 AM, Tony Bacigalupo
> > <tonybacigal...@gmail.com>wrote:
> > > Agreed all around. So should we simply removed the "disparaging" or
> > > get rid of the clause altogether? Is it important to have protection
> > > against defamation?
> > > Also, since the space isn't open yet, we'll be adding stipulations
> > > that membership won't start until after the space is open, and that
> > > the space will open within a certain range of dates or the agreement is
> null and void.
> > > Anything else?
> > > On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 8:27 AM, patrick.tang...@gmail.com <
> > > patrick.tang...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> > statements or comments of a defamatory or disparaging nature to
> > >> > any third party regarding NEW
> > >> Yeah, we based our contract on IH too (thanks Alex!) but took out
> > >> "disparaging" after the first round of signings, "defamation" is
> > >> one thing but with "disparaging" in there it looks like we don't
> > >> want to be critiqued either.
> > >> Btw, if anyone opens up a space in Canada, our version has a couple
> > >> of local tweaks so feel free to ask for the file.
> > >> Patrick
> > >> station-c.com- Hide quoted text -
On Sep 29, 11:51 pm, "Mike Schinkel" <mikeschin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> An open source working agreement would be GREAT.
> I don't know how much I can contribute (legally), but would love to > see one created and will provide ideas the best I can.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: coworking@googlegroups.com [mailto:coworking@googlegroups.com] > On
> Behalf Of Alex Linsker
> Sent: Monday, September 29, 2008 5:04 AM
> To: Coworking
> Subject: [Coworking] Re: New Work City membership agreement - version > 1
> Hi Alex,
> I'd like to help create an open source working agreement. Although > I'm not a lawyer, I've worked for lawyers in relevant fields, and have > written employment, partnership, client and outsourcing contracts > which have been greenlighted by some of the best lawyers. I'm great > at writing really plain-language, simple, direct, easy-to-read contracts.
> What's the next step?
> -Alex
> Alex Linsker
> (646) 269-4915
> alexlins...@gmail.comwww.alexlinsker.com > Organizational democracy: helping people work together in companies
> On Sep 26, 11:01 am, "Alex Hillman" <dangerouslyawes...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > To the many of you who've worked from our agreement:
> > Ours was taken from a very generic "shared space" agreement that I > > found somewhere on the web. We needed something FAST, so we slightly > > modded the TOS that I'd found and worked from there.
> > It's been my desire for over a year now to tone down that agreement, > > it's got a lot of garbage and legalese in it.
> > If anyone is interested in working with Geoff and myself, as well as > > if anyone has any legal resources that could chip in, I'd love to > > work together to create an open source coworking agreement that > > covers what really needs to be covered, and cuts out all of the other
crap.
> > On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 10:58 AM, Tony Bacigalupo
> > <tonybacigal...@gmail.com>wrote:
> > > Agreed all around. So should we simply removed the "disparaging" > > > or get rid of the clause altogether? Is it important to have > > > protection against defamation?
> > > Also, since the space isn't open yet, we'll be adding stipulations > > > that membership won't start until after the space is open, and > > > that the space will open within a certain range of dates or the > > > agreement is
> null and void.
> > > Anything else?
> > > On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 8:27 AM, patrick.tang...@gmail.com < > > > patrick.tang...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> > statements or comments of a defamatory or disparaging nature to > > >> > any third party regarding NEW
> > >> Yeah, we based our contract on IH too (thanks Alex!) but took out > > >> "disparaging" after the first round of signings, "defamation" is > > >> one thing but with "disparaging" in there it looks like we don't > > >> want to be critiqued either.
> > >> Btw, if anyone opens up a space in Canada, our version has a > > >> couple of local tweaks so feel free to ask for the file.
> > >> Patrick
> > >> station-c.com- Hide quoted text -
> >> We are however, working up a very thorough partnership agreement for an > LLC. Anyone need one of those? :)
> Yes. :)
> -Mike
> -----Original Message----- > From: coworking@googlegroups.com [mailto:coworking@googlegroups.com] On > Behalf Of Dusty > Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2008 3:10 AM > To: Coworking > Subject: [Coworking] Re: New Work City membership agreement - version 1
> I'd also dig helping with an open source coworking member agreement. > We're currently not using one at Conjunctured! :o
> We are however, working up a very thorough partnership agreement for an > LLC. > Anyone need one of those? :)
> Would be nice to have a open source coworking legal library.
> On Sep 29, 11:51 pm, "Mike Schinkel" <mikeschin...@gmail.com> wrote: > > An open source working agreement would be GREAT. > > I don't know how much I can contribute (legally), but would love to > > see one created and will provide ideas the best I can.
> > Behalf Of Alex Linsker > > Sent: Monday, September 29, 2008 5:04 AM > > To: Coworking > > Subject: [Coworking] Re: New Work City membership agreement - version > > 1
> > Hi Alex,
> > I'd like to help create an open source working agreement. Although > > I'm not a lawyer, I've worked for lawyers in relevant fields, and have > > written employment, partnership, client and outsourcing contracts > > which have been greenlighted by some of the best lawyers. I'm great > > at writing really plain-language, simple, direct, easy-to-read contracts.
> > What's the next step?
> > -Alex
> > Alex Linsker > > (646) 269-4915 > > alexlins...@gmail.comwww.alexlinsker.com > > Organizational democracy: helping people work together in companies
> > On Sep 26, 11:01 am, "Alex Hillman" <dangerouslyawes...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > To the many of you who've worked from our agreement: > > > Ours was taken from a very generic "shared space" agreement that I > > > found somewhere on the web. We needed something FAST, so we slightly > > > modded the TOS that I'd found and worked from there.
> > > It's been my desire for over a year now to tone down that agreement, > > > it's got a lot of garbage and legalese in it.
> > > If anyone is interested in working with Geoff and myself, as well as > > > if anyone has any legal resources that could chip in, I'd love to > > > work together to create an open source coworking agreement that > > > covers what really needs to be covered, and cuts out all of the other > crap.
> > > On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 10:58 AM, Tony Bacigalupo > > > <tonybacigal...@gmail.com>wrote:
> > > > Agreed all around. So should we simply removed the "disparaging" > > > > or get rid of the clause altogether? Is it important to have > > > > protection against defamation?
> > > > Also, since the space isn't open yet, we'll be adding stipulations > > > > that membership won't start until after the space is open, and > > > > that the space will open within a certain range of dates or the > > > > agreement is > > null and void.
> > > > Anything else?
> > > > On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 8:27 AM, patrick.tang...@gmail.com < > > > > patrick.tang...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> > statements or comments of a defamatory or disparaging nature to > > > >> > any third party regarding NEW
> > > >> Yeah, we based our contract on IH too (thanks Alex!) but took out > > > >> "disparaging" after the first round of signings, "defamation" is > > > >> one thing but with "disparaging" in there it looks like we don't > > > >> want to be critiqued either.
> > > >> Btw, if anyone opens up a space in Canada, our version has a > > > >> couple of local tweaks so feel free to ask for the file.
> > > >> Patrick > > > >> station-c.com- Hide quoted text -
> >> We are however, working up a very thorough partnership agreement for an > LLC. Anyone need one of those? :)
> Yes. :)
> -Mike
> -----Original Message----- > From: coworking@googlegroups.com [mailto:coworking@googlegroups.com] On > Behalf Of Dusty > Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2008 3:10 AM > To: Coworking > Subject: [Coworking] Re: New Work City membership agreement - version 1
> I'd also dig helping with an open source coworking member agreement. > We're currently not using one at Conjunctured! :o
> We are however, working up a very thorough partnership agreement for an > LLC. > Anyone need one of those? :)
> Would be nice to have a open source coworking legal library.
> On Sep 29, 11:51 pm, "Mike Schinkel" <mikeschin...@gmail.com> wrote: > > An open source working agreement would be GREAT. > > I don't know how much I can contribute (legally), but would love to > > see one created and will provide ideas the best I can.
> > Behalf Of Alex Linsker > > Sent: Monday, September 29, 2008 5:04 AM > > To: Coworking > > Subject: [Coworking] Re: New Work City membership agreement - version > > 1
> > Hi Alex,
> > I'd like to help create an open source working agreement. Although > > I'm not a lawyer, I've worked for lawyers in relevant fields, and have > > written employment, partnership, client and outsourcing contracts > > which have been greenlighted by some of the best lawyers. I'm great > > at writing really plain-language, simple, direct, easy-to-read contracts.
> > What's the next step?
> > -Alex
> > Alex Linsker > > (646) 269-4915 > > alexlins...@gmail.comwww.alexlinsker.com > > Organizational democracy: helping people work together in companies
> > On Sep 26, 11:01 am, "Alex Hillman" <dangerouslyawes...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > To the many of you who've worked from our agreement: > > > Ours was taken from a very generic "shared space" agreement that I > > > found somewhere on the web. We needed something FAST, so we slightly > > > modded the TOS that I'd found and worked from there.
> > > It's been my desire for over a year now to tone down that agreement, > > > it's got a lot of garbage and legalese in it.
> > > If anyone is interested in working with Geoff and myself, as well as > > > if anyone has any legal resources that could chip in, I'd love to > > > work together to create an open source coworking agreement that > > > covers what really needs to be covered, and cuts out all of the other > crap.
> > > On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 10:58 AM, Tony Bacigalupo > > > <tonybacigal...@gmail.com>wrote:
> > > > Agreed all around. So should we simply removed the "disparaging" > > > > or get rid of the clause altogether? Is it important to have > > > > protection against defamation?
> > > > Also, since the space isn't open yet, we'll be adding stipulations > > > > that membership won't start until after the space is open, and > > > > that the space will open within a certain range of dates or the > > > > agreement is > > null and void.
> > > > Anything else?
> > > > On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 8:27 AM, patrick.tang...@gmail.com < > > > > patrick.tang...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> > statements or comments of a defamatory or disparaging nature to > > > >> > any third party regarding NEW
> > > >> Yeah, we based our contract on IH too (thanks Alex!) but took out > > > >> "disparaging" after the first round of signings, "defamation" is > > > >> one thing but with "disparaging" in there it looks like we don't > > > >> want to be critiqued either.
> > > >> Btw, if anyone opens up a space in Canada, our version has a > > > >> couple of local tweaks so feel free to ask for the file.
> > > >> Patrick > > > >> station-c.com- Hide quoted text -
So there are several things here: * A CoWorking Legal Library * An Open Source CoWorking Legal Agreement (in various forms)
Can we agree as a group, in principle on a few things: * A license governing all of the documentation. It can't contain legalese specific to on of the contributing organizations. * A way of collaborating on the CoWorking Legal Agreement * A permanent repository for the CoWorking Legal Library ?
Did I miss anything? Eventually we would need to develop some FAQs and such for the Legal Library.
> On Sep 29, 11:51 pm, "Mike Schinkel" <mikeschin...@gmail.com> wrote: >> An open source working agreement would be GREAT. >> I don't know how much I can contribute (legally), but would love to see one >> created and will provide ideas the best I can.
>> -----Original Message----- >> From: coworking@googlegroups.com [mailto:coworking@googlegroups.com] On
>> Behalf Of Alex Linsker >> Sent: Monday, September 29, 2008 5:04 AM >> To: Coworking >> Subject: [Coworking] Re: New Work City membership agreement - version 1
>> Hi Alex,
>> I'd like to help create an open source working agreement. Although I'm not >> a lawyer, I've worked for lawyers in relevant fields, and have written >> employment, partnership, client and outsourcing contracts which have been >> greenlighted by some of the best lawyers. I'm great at writing really >> plain-language, simple, direct, easy-to-read contracts.
>> What's the next step?
>> -Alex
>> Alex Linsker >> (646) 269-4915 >> alexlins...@gmail.comwww.alexlinsker.com >> Organizational democracy: helping people work together in companies
>> On Sep 26, 11:01 am, "Alex Hillman" <dangerouslyawes...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > To the many of you who've worked from our agreement: >> > Ours was taken from a very generic "shared space" agreement that I >> > found somewhere on the web. We needed something FAST, so we slightly >> > modded the TOS that I'd found and worked from there.
>> > It's been my desire for over a year now to tone down that agreement, >> > it's got a lot of garbage and legalese in it.
>> > If anyone is interested in working with Geoff and myself, as well as >> > if anyone has any legal resources that could chip in, I'd love to work >> > together to create an open source coworking agreement that covers what >> > really needs to be covered, and cuts out all of the other crap.
>> > On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 10:58 AM, Tony Bacigalupo >> > <tonybacigal...@gmail.com>wrote:
>> > > Agreed all around. So should we simply removed the "disparaging" or >> > > get rid of the clause altogether? Is it important to have protection >> > > against defamation?
>> > > Also, since the space isn't open yet, we'll be adding stipulations >> > > that membership won't start until after the space is open, and that >> > > the space will open within a certain range of dates or the agreement is >> null and void.
>> > > Anything else?
>> > > On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 8:27 AM, patrick.tang...@gmail.com < >> > > patrick.tang...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >> > statements or comments of a defamatory or disparaging nature to >> > >> > any third party regarding NEW
>> > >> Yeah, we based our contract on IH too (thanks Alex!) but took out >> > >> "disparaging" after the first round of signings, "defamation" is >> > >> one thing but with "disparaging" in there it looks like we don't >> > >> want to be critiqued either.
>> > >> Btw, if anyone opens up a space in Canada, our version has a couple >> > >> of local tweaks so feel free to ask for the file.
>> > >> Patrick >> > >> station-c.com- Hide quoted text -
David, I like your idea of a legal library and an open source
agreement for coworking.
> * A license governing all of the documentation. It can't contain
> legalese specific to on of the contributing organizations.
Maybe we can create an overall "operating system" coworking agreement
which can apply to all coworking groups, and we can also create
"plugins" -- paragraphs which can be inserted to the agreements of the
organizations to which they apply? For example, we might create a one-
page "General Coworking Legal Agreement," and we might create plugin
paragraphs/clauses, for example:
- if you have a few members who own the lease and sublease to other
members, or another paragraph if
- you have all the members share the lease.
> * A way of collaborating on the CoWorking Legal Agreement
I'll ask Vanessa Scanlon if we can use MixedInk.com, which is in
beta. MixedInk is an awesome way for groups to write agreements and
agree on what the final text will be.
> * A permanent repository for the CoWorking Legal Library
-Alex (of CooperBricolage/New Work City in NYC)
--
Alex Linsker
(646) 269-4915
alexlins...@gmail.com
www.alexlinsker.com Organizational democracy: helping people work together in companies
On Sep 30, 12:53 pm, "David J. Kordsmeier" <dko...@gmail.com> wrote:
> So there are several things here:
> * A CoWorking Legal Library
> * An Open Source CoWorking Legal Agreement (in various forms)
> Can we agree as a group, in principle on a few things:
> * A license governing all of the documentation. It can't contain
> legalese specific to on of the contributing organizations.
> * A way of collaborating on the CoWorking Legal Agreement
> * A permanent repository for the CoWorking Legal Library
> ?
> Did I miss anything? Eventually we would need to develop some FAQs
> and such for the Legal Library.
> -
> David
> On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 12:10 AM, Dusty <dustyrea...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I'd also dig helping with an open source coworking member agreement.
> > We're currently not using one at Conjunctured! :o
> > We are however, working up a very thorough partnership agreement for
> > an LLC. Anyone need one of those? :)
> > Would be nice to have a open source coworking legal library.
> > On Sep 29, 11:51 pm, "Mike Schinkel" <mikeschin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> An open source working agreement would be GREAT.
> >> I don't know how much I can contribute (legally), but would love to see one
> >> created and will provide ideas the best I can.
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: coworking@googlegroups.com [mailto:coworking@googlegroups.com] On
> >> Behalf Of Alex Linsker
> >> Sent: Monday, September 29, 2008 5:04 AM
> >> To: Coworking
> >> Subject: [Coworking] Re: New Work City membership agreement - version 1
> >> Hi Alex,
> >> I'd like to help create an open source working agreement. Although I'm not
> >> a lawyer, I've worked for lawyers in relevant fields, and have written
> >> employment, partnership, client and outsourcing contracts which have been
> >> greenlighted by some of the best lawyers. I'm great at writing really
> >> plain-language, simple, direct, easy-to-read contracts.
> >> What's the next step?
> >> -Alex
> >> Alex Linsker
> >> (646) 269-4915
> >> alexlins...@gmail.comwww.alexlinsker.com > >> Organizational democracy: helping people work together in companies
> >> On Sep 26, 11:01 am, "Alex Hillman" <dangerouslyawes...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > To the many of you who've worked from our agreement:
> >> > Ours was taken from a very generic "shared space" agreement that I
> >> > found somewhere on the web. We needed something FAST, so we slightly
> >> > modded the TOS that I'd found and worked from there.
> >> > It's been my desire for over a year now to tone down that agreement,
> >> > it's got a lot of garbage and legalese in it.
> >> > If anyone is interested in working with Geoff and myself, as well as
> >> > if anyone has any legal resources that could chip in, I'd love to work
> >> > together to create an open source coworking agreement that covers what
> >> > really needs to be covered, and cuts out all of the other crap.
> >> > On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 10:58 AM, Tony Bacigalupo
> >> > <tonybacigal...@gmail.com>wrote:
> >> > > Agreed all around. So should we simply removed the "disparaging" or
> >> > > get rid of the clause altogether? Is it important to have protection
> >> > > against defamation?
> >> > > Also, since the space isn't open yet, we'll be adding stipulations
> >> > > that membership won't start until after the space is open, and that
> >> > > the space will open within a certain range of dates or the agreement is
> >> null and void.
> >> > > Anything else?
> >> > > On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 8:27 AM, patrick.tang...@gmail.com <
> >> > > patrick.tang...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >> > statements or comments of a defamatory or disparaging nature to
> >> > >> > any third party regarding NEW
> >> > >> Yeah, we based our contract on IH too (thanks Alex!) but took out
> >> > >> "disparaging" after the first round of signings, "defamation" is
> >> > >> one thing but with "disparaging" in there it looks like we don't
> >> > >> want to be critiqued either.
> >> > >> Btw, if anyone opens up a space in Canada, our version has a couple
> >> > >> of local tweaks so feel free to ask for the file.
> >> > >> Patrick
> >> > >> station-c.com- Hide quoted text -
|
