| 1 |
On Sunday 25 March 2007, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote: |
| 2 |
> Christel Dahlskjaer wrote: |
| 3 |
> > It looks like our social contract doesn't prohibit Gentoo from being |
| 4 |
> > dependent upon a single sponsor or corporation. In the interests of |
| 5 |
> > keeping Gentoo run by the developers rather than any outside party, how |
| 6 |
> > about the following addition to the Social Contract? |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> > <heading>We will be run by the Development Community</> |
| 9 |
> > Gentoo will be run by the development community. We will never allow |
| 10 |
> > ourselves to be reliant upon a single sponsor or corporation. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> As I understand it, Gentoo is a "tax-exempt foundation" registered in |
| 13 |
> the state of New Mexico. As a result, there are legal restrictions on |
| 14 |
> "sponsorship", etc. Before modifying the "Social Contract", I'd |
| 15 |
> recommend consulting an attorney with expertise in such matters. The |
| 16 |
> last thing Gentoo needs is major legal hassles. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
your information is dated ... Gentoo is not a tax-exempt foundation |
| 19 |
specifically so that we dont have to worry about getting screwed when a |
| 20 |
single entity decided to donate a ton of cash ... in other words, most |
| 21 |
foundations choose to be a 501(c)(3) so that donaters can have tax write offs |
| 22 |
while Gentoo is a 501(c)(1) |
| 23 |
-mike |
Archives