[MUD-Dev] Criminalize Community Volunteers?

[Koster]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: mud-dev-admin at kanga.nu 
> [mailto:mud-dev-admin at kanga.nu]On Behalf Of
> F. Randall Farmer
> Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2000 11:41 AM
> To: mud-dev at kanga.nu
> Subject: RE: [MUD-Dev] Criminalize Community Volunteers?
> 
> No matter what, this case will probably clarify what it
> is to be  an online volunteer is vs. an employee. A
> company's for-profit status won't be the key factor:
> it's compensation, commitment, working environment, and
> job requirements/selection that will more likely
> be the differences.

As I understand it, there are actually some very specific things in labor
law already regarding what the definition of an employee is. Among them: are
you volunteering to do what is already your job? (That's illegal--you can't
volunteer to put in extra hours at Burger King for free--the empoyer would
be liable). Are you receving any form of compensation to which monetary
value can be put? Does said compensation come at regular intervals based on
time worked? Are you required to keep certain hours? Are you required to
report on your work or progress? Have you been doing the same job for over
twelve months?

> It may end up being that _any_ monetary compensation
> (or in kind) will be the defining factor. That is what
> UO obviously thinks. That'd be a shame, IMO, but it
> isn't the end-all of volunteers. Not at all. The Palace
> doesn't pay its Helpers/Hosts/Moderators in any way.
> And we're not all that worried about this suit.

It's not just pay, of course; compensation in the form of free access is
what UO offered.

-Raph



_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
https://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev