[Owasp-leaders] [Owasp-board] OWASP Board decision that I don't agree with

Jim Manico jim.manico at owasp.org
Mon Jan 6 08:45:45 UTC 2014


Cool. We are all on the same page. :) 

Here is a good reference to help us understand our legal limits when conducting activities to influence laws (ie: lobbying or similar activities).

http://www.njnonprofits.org/NPsCanLobby.html

Aloha,
Jim

> And that _exactly_ what I meant :)
> 
> We should definitely not get involved in party politics in any country, but
> we should get involved in the 'politics' of application security,e.g.
> attempting to influence proposed laws that are directly related to our
> mission.
> 
> Simon
> 
> 
> On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 11:21 PM, Tobias <tobias.gondrom at owasp.org> wrote:
> 
>>  Jim,
>>
>> reading your link, *our non-profit status does in fact _not_ forbid us
>> from getting involved in politics as in advocating our mission and making
>> public statements about it. *
>>
>> There is a huge difference between political campaigning on behalf of any
>> candidate for elective public office (which is forbidden for non-profit)
>> and general advocacy and politics aka an organisation making a public
>> statement or advocating that certain things are in line with our OWASP
>> mission and a really good idea and others are against the OWASP mission aka
>> a really bad idea.
>>
>> For anyone interested, I recommend to follow and read the link that you
>> sent, it specifies that a political campaign in the sense of the IRS is:
>> "What is a political campaign? In general, the IRS rule refers to campaigns
>> between people who are running for offices in public elections. These can
>> include: candidates running for president of the U.S.; candidates running
>> for governor; candidates running for mayor; and also candidates for lower
>> elected offices such as school board officials, city supervisors, and
>> county trustees."
>>
>> And in fact your article explicitly states that: *"Your organization can
>> engage in legislative advocacy and issue-related advocacy, as long as it
>> follows certain rules and steers clear of political campaigning. "* (for
>> those interested in what these certain rules are: that a non-profit does
>> not have “substantial part” of its overall activities relates to
>> influencing legislation or carrying on propaganda. Roughly anything under
>> 5% of the overall budget is considered not substantial, while expenditures
>> of above 15% would probably be considered substantial - e.g. 5% would be
>> with our current budget size spending of more than USD 100.000(!) on
>> lobbying....)
>>
>> We are free and safe to advocate our mission and to make public statements
>> to communicate our mission. (And nobody would want for OWASP to politically
>> campaign for the next candidate for presidency, governor, mayor or
>> political party of any country.)
>>
>> All the best, Tobias
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 05/01/14 21:02, Jim Manico wrote:
>>
>>  OWASP _should_ get involved in politics -
>>
>>  Our non profit status strictly forbids us from being involved in
>> political campaigns and more. This is a requirement of getting huge
>> tax breaks. If we do want to be more involved in politics we would
>> need to change the organizational structure and drop the non-profit
>> status.
>> http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/limits-political-campaigning-501c3-nonprofits-29982.html
>>
>> --
>> Jim Manico
>> @Manicode(808) 652-3805
>>
>>  On Jan 5, 2014, at 1:05 AM, psiinon <psiinon at gmail.com> <psiinon at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> OWASP _should_ get involved in politics -
>>
>>  _______________________________________________
>> Owasp-board mailing listOwasp-board at lists.owasp.orghttps://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board
>>
>>
>>
> 
> 



More information about the OWASP-Leaders mailing list