| 1 |
The law firm is [Redacted] ([Redacted]) They are |
| 2 |
actually pretty good - I think the problem is that it is very time-consuming |
| 3 |
(and thus expensive) to give a lawyer (even a technically savvy one) an |
| 4 |
in-depth, meaningful understanding of how the Gentoo project works, |
| 5 |
including all the subtle details they need to know. Think of all the courses |
| 6 |
of action a developer may want to pursue with their works, and the |
| 7 |
possibilities can become overwhelming. (Including posting their code on |
| 8 |
non-Gentoo web space, personal gentoo.org Web space, submitting to bugzilla, |
| 9 |
posting to mailing list, pasting or dcc'ing on irc, committing to portage |
| 10 |
tree, submitting a patch to a gentoo or 3rd-party work, etc. etc.) |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
That's why I'd recommend that *you guys* (the trustees) actually write the |
| 13 |
legal documentation, and simply use your new legal counsel to ensure that |
| 14 |
what you have written is legal and sufficiently comprehensive. Working the |
| 15 |
other way (explaining to a lawyer how the Gentoo project works, then asking |
| 16 |
them to write an appropriate legal document) is not very effective, and I'd |
| 17 |
expect this to be the case even if Lawrence Lessig himself were writing the |
| 18 |
document. The lawyer will not have sufficient understanding of the |
| 19 |
particular needs of Gentoo. The trustees have the experience necessary to |
| 20 |
write a comprehensive document. Someone unfamiliar with the Gentoo project |
| 21 |
does not. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
You know what the document is supposed to do - and if in some areas you do |
| 24 |
not, it is ultimately you who must decide what it is supposed to do anyway, |
| 25 |
not the lawyer's. The lawyer's job should be to make sure that the document |
| 26 |
holds legal water. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Anyway, that's my 2 cents :) |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Regards, |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
Daniel |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
-----Original Message----- |
| 35 |
From: Paul de Vrieze [mailto:pauldv@g.o] |
| 36 |
Sent: Friday, October 01, 2004 3:17 PM |
| 37 |
To: gentoo-trustees@l.g.o |
| 38 |
Subject: Re: [gentoo-trustees] October 8th Meeting attendance |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
On Friday 01 October 2004 23:03, Daniel Robbins wrote: |
| 41 |
> The copyright document was prepared by another firm, not [Redacted]. |
| 42 |
> You probably shouldn't talk to them unless you're planning to pay |
| 43 |
> them, because I'm quite sure they will charge you (or me) quite |
| 44 |
> extravagantly for their time. :/ |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
As they do not seem to know the computer business very well I guess that |
| 47 |
would be a major waste of money. We can tell [Redacted] who it were, but I |
| 48 |
agree that we shouldn't talk. |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
Paul |
| 51 |
|
| 52 |
-- |
| 53 |
Paul de Vrieze |
| 54 |
Gentoo Developer |
| 55 |
Mail: pauldv@g.o |
| 56 |
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net |
| 57 |
|
| 58 |
|
| 59 |
-- |
| 60 |
gentoo-trustees@g.o mailing list |
Archives