| 1 |
On 13/11/2016 23:33, Raymond Jennings wrote: |
| 2 |
> My personal opinion here is that *anything* to do with legal issues, |
| 3 |
> such as legal liability, no matter how theoretical, is something the |
| 4 |
> trustees should be involved in. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
I already enumerated the situations that would involve the foundation. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
On the contrary of companies that can be sued if somebody hired by them |
| 9 |
harasses or worse another person within the company, the foundation, |
| 10 |
being unrelated to the Gentoo community barring acting as a piggy bank, |
| 11 |
cannot be sued. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
There isn't any specific requirement for that and there isn't any |
| 14 |
contract that ties the people volunteering their free time to do |
| 15 |
something in Gentoo with the foundation (since the copyright assignment |
| 16 |
got killed as I mentioned before). |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
> Per my own dev quiz, the foundation's job is to worry about legal |
| 19 |
> issues (lawsuits, copyrights, etc) and financial issues (donations, |
| 20 |
> server hardware) so that the codemonkey developers don't have to. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Even copyright is a gray area thanks to the fact a large deal of |
| 23 |
developers lives in Europe. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
> That is why I CCed the trustees when the logo stuff on third party |
| 26 |
> sites came up. I don't think there's any conspiracy to keep the |
| 27 |
> trustees in the dark, but I *do* perceive a lack of communication. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
The fact trustees have no mean to peek in / influence Council or Comrel |
| 30 |
shields the foundation from lawsuits. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
lu |
Archives