Re: [gentoo-project] Formally have Council oversee the Foundation 2.0

[William L. Thomson Jr.]

On Sunday, January 15, 2017 8:01:02 PM EST Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 15, 2017 at 5:23 PM, Raymond Jennings <shentino@×××××.com>
wrote:
> > IIRC the whole purpose of the gentoo foundation is to own the IP and
> > insulate the actual developers from legal issues, thus saith my dev
> > quizzes.
> Keep in mind that at least under US law corporations generally shield
> their INVESTORS from liability, but not their employees.

Why I keep saying Developers have liability. Though are not employees, they 
are pretty close. They definitely bring liability to Gentoo.

> If I break a law at work, I certainly can be subject to criminal
> prosecution.  This is also increasingly the trend (see the Yate's Memo
> for starters).
>
> Maybe the Foundation might serve as a more attractive target for a
> lawsuit, but the fact that you stick Gentoo's name on something
> doesn't end your personal liability.

This is true, and same goes for the waiver of fitness and liability on FOSS 
licenses.

> > Similiarly, "gentoo" cannot be sued, because it does not exist as a legal
> > entity.  The Gentoo Foundation, however, can sue and be sued.
>
> Sure, but being able to be sued isn't actually a good thing.  :)  It
> is just an inevitable consequence to legally holding property.

To own property you need an entity. IP is property just not so much tangible.  
Infra hardware is tangible, contributions not so much but still have an owner.

> If you use an umbrella org then they become the one who has to worry
> about being sued, and presumably they're better at it.

That is a misunderstanding, and is not part of the services from the SPI. They 
are a financial body not legal. They use the SFLC for legal assistance, maybe 
other counsel as well.

-- 
William L. Thomson Jr.