| 1 |
On Sat, Apr 7, 2018 at 3:07 PM, Matthew Thode <prometheanfire@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 18-04-07 21:01:38, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: |
| 3 |
>> Am Samstag, 7. April 2018, 20:37:21 CEST schrieb Matthew Thode: |
| 4 |
>> |
| 5 |
>> > Second, I highly doubt that any other org would be willing to manage the |
| 6 |
>> > project without at least some sort of license/trademark agreement |
| 7 |
>> > between the foundation and them. |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
>> As long as no public representation takes place, I see no need for that. |
| 10 |
>> However, this is a valid point that needs to be considered. |
| 11 |
>> |
| 12 |
>> > Third, I also doubt any org stepping in would want to manage one of two |
| 13 |
>> > accounts (bank wise), they'd want to manage all the money. |
| 14 |
>> |
| 15 |
>> Incorrect. |
| 16 |
>> |
| 17 |
>> (And if you ever bothered to actually read my mails, I already pointed that |
| 18 |
>> out.) |
| 19 |
>> |
| 20 |
>> Quoting the SPI web pages: "SPI does not prohibit the project from having a |
| 21 |
>> similar relationship with other fiscal sponsors." |
| 22 |
>> |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> Thanks for this, I haven't had time to catch up everywhere, this list |
| 25 |
> suddenly went into high traffic mode... |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
>> > We'd be replacing one structure, where two groups think they |
| 28 |
>> > are in charge but one legally is, with two groups who think they are in |
| 29 |
>> > charge and both legally are. |
| 30 |
>> |
| 31 |
>> That sentence brings up a philosophical question. What happens if you think |
| 32 |
>> you're in charge, but nobody else does? (maybe except veremit) |
| 33 |
>> |
| 34 |
> |
| 35 |
> Eventually, if the person thinking they were in charge (but not actually |
| 36 |
> in charge) were to do something intolerable in the view of the group |
| 37 |
> actually in charge, they'd be fired / kicked out. The could possibly |
| 38 |
> extend to the removing of licencing/trademark privileges if any exist. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
That last bit only applies if the people in charge own any |
| 41 |
trademarks/etc. There wouldn't be much to be done with licenses since |
| 42 |
Gentoo is FOSS. |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
If the Foundation got kicked out it seems like they only thing they |
| 45 |
could try to do is ask everybody to change the project name. Maybe |
| 46 |
they could try to seize control over the domain name or something. |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
-- |
| 49 |
Rich |
Archives