| 1 |
On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 1:13 PM, Dale <rdalek1967@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 12:35 PM, William L. Thomson Jr. |
| 4 |
>> <wlt-ml@××××××.com> wrote: |
| 5 |
>>> On Monday, January 16, 2017 11:56:43 AM EST Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 6 |
>>>> And nobody really has a choice about whether they'll handle lawsuits. |
| 7 |
>>>> If you own property, then you better have a plan for handling |
| 8 |
>>>> lawsuits. I suspect that SPI has thought this through a bit more than |
| 9 |
>>>> we have historically. |
| 10 |
>>> The SPI is not a legal management entity. You are confusing fiscal with legal. |
| 11 |
>>> |
| 12 |
>> Again, I think you're thinking I'm saying I'm not. |
| 13 |
>> |
| 14 |
>> I'm not saying that the Gentoo Foundation should retain the legal |
| 15 |
>> services of SPI. I'm saying that they should turn over their property |
| 16 |
>> to SPI and cease to exist. At that point we don't need legal |
| 17 |
>> services, because we legally don't exist. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> I have been looking at the SPI website, other than managing money and |
| 21 |
> controlling assets, SPI does not appear to do anything else management |
| 22 |
> wise. Do you have a link to the SPI website that says it does what you |
| 23 |
> claim? |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
I don't claim that SPI does anything other than manage money or assets. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
>>>> In any case, the point is that if Gentoo moves under SPI then there |
| 29 |
>>>> would be no "Gentoo" to sue. "Gentoo" would be a trademark of SPI. |
| 30 |
>>>> Any copyrights on our works that are held centrally would belong to |
| 31 |
>>>> SPI. Our money would be stored in SPI bank accounts. So, if you want |
| 32 |
>>>> our stuff, you have to sue SPI. |
| 33 |
>>> Completely WRONG! |
| 34 |
>>> |
| 35 |
>>> "Project Independence |
| 36 |
>>> SPI does not own, govern or control the associated projects." |
| 37 |
>>> http://www.spi-inc.org/projects/relationship/ |
| 38 |
>> They wouldn't own the project. They would own our assets. They |
| 39 |
>> wouldn't control anything. |
| 40 |
>> |
| 41 |
> |
| 42 |
> They would own the assets but I have found nothing that says Gentoo |
| 43 |
> can't be sued still or that SPI would provide a defense for Gentoo. The |
| 44 |
> only case I can think of, if the IRS comes after Gentoo and SPI is |
| 45 |
> handling the money and paperwork. Then SPI would step in. |
| 46 |
> |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
How would somebody sue "Gentoo" when Gentoo is just a trademark of |
| 49 |
SPI? There would be no legal entity called Gentoo to sue. That's the |
| 50 |
whole point. If somebody wants to sue SPI then that becomes SPI's |
| 51 |
problem, though obviously as a project we would cooperate with them to |
| 52 |
minimize this risk. |
| 53 |
|
| 54 |
-- |
| 55 |
Rich |
Archives