Re: [gentoo-trustees] FW: [gentoo-nfp] I met with my lawyer

[Kurt Lieber]

On Thu, Jul 15, 2004 at 04:18:02PM -0600 or thereabouts, Daniel Robbins wrote:
> Could I drop my obligation to pay for the funding of the 501(c)(x) if I
> wanted, for example? Could I decide to transfer the Gentoo name and logo to
> me personally, rather than the foundation, but give the foundation an
> unlimited license to use it, so that legal disclaimers read "Gentoo is a
> registered trademark of Daniel Robbins" just like it says "Linux is a
> registered trademark of Linus Torvalds?"

Daniel -- all we're trying to do is to do what is best for Gentoo.  That is
what you asked us to do originally.  I'm very sorry if you perceive our
seeking of a second opinion as a violation of the agreement we made.  As
Grant said, I never perceived it to be an agreement, but more of a
guideline.  The message I took away was, "be gentle caretakers" and "do
what is best for our users".  

None of us have anything to gain from second-guessing your original choice
for a 501(c)(6) status.  There are no ulterior motives.  We simply weren't
involved with the decision making process and, now that we're charged with
the caretaking of Gentoo, maybe we need to make sure that we're more
informed about the decisions that have been made to this point.  The only
reason we are doing this is to ensure that we are being the best caretakers
possible.  Why are you so upset over this?  Why is it even an issue?

You are taking this personally and I wish you wouldn't.  What you don't
realize is we're doing exactly what you asked us to do, which is to ensure
we protect the interests of our users.

--kurt