Re: [gentoo-project] Meeting agenda - Council meeting 2018-04-08

[Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org>]

On Sat, Apr 7, 2018 at 3:07 PM, Matthew Thode <prometheanfire@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On 18-04-07 21:01:38, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
>> Am Samstag, 7. April 2018, 20:37:21 CEST schrieb Matthew Thode:
>>
>> > Second, I highly doubt that any other org would be willing to manage the
>> > project without at least some sort of license/trademark agreement
>> > between the foundation and them.
>>
>> As long as no public representation takes place, I see no need for that.
>> However, this is a valid point that needs to be considered.
>>
>> > Third,  I also doubt any org stepping in would want to manage one of two
>> > accounts (bank wise), they'd want to manage all the money.
>>
>> Incorrect.
>>
>> (And if you ever bothered to actually read my mails, I already pointed that
>> out.)
>>
>> Quoting the SPI web pages: "SPI does not prohibit the project from having a
>> similar relationship with other fiscal sponsors."
>>
>
> Thanks for this, I haven't had time to catch up everywhere, this list
> suddenly went into high traffic mode...
>
>> > We'd be replacing one structure, where two groups think they
>> > are in charge but one legally is, with two groups who think they are in
>> > charge and both legally are.
>>
>> That sentence brings up a philosophical question. What happens if you think
>> you're in charge, but nobody else does? (maybe except veremit)
>>
>
> Eventually, if the person thinking they were in charge (but not actually
> in charge) were to do something intolerable in the view of the group
> actually in charge, they'd be fired / kicked out.  The could possibly
> extend to the removing of licencing/trademark privileges if any exist.

That last bit only applies if the people in charge own any
trademarks/etc.  There wouldn't be much to be done with licenses since
Gentoo is FOSS.

If the Foundation got kicked out it seems like they only thing they
could try to do is ask everybody to change the project name.  Maybe
they could try to seize control over the domain name or something.

-- 
Rich