From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2E7EC139085 for ; Mon, 16 Jan 2017 19:13:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 43EC721C121; Mon, 16 Jan 2017 19:13:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-yw0-x244.google.com (mail-yw0-x244.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c05::244]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 15FBD21C0A0 for ; Mon, 16 Jan 2017 19:13:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-yw0-x244.google.com with SMTP id 17so9638315ywk.2 for ; Mon, 16 Jan 2017 11:13:36 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=iowsunUTmJwntdR3YFU0gAmm/r8u8IO/VZDPAXwpwfs=; b=Fp0lcfVXOHtmc1kDcOSKAH44vMTR+hXkJU7zGsbUXDHeU1GSs3bMd/ImkfhBlNu8aX EobdB5MpWwe/oZrcI8b37WFdIVp+4u6/XAYnzZ8ves84MQkQchW7gxp+MUGKjOunMZNS cpcZOgj3C/nHhE66Wb6gsa3ZUUVOqzf4XcJcrSnc4l1TeDsvRJHzbSkQdq6Ky1xKqgD0 KELfttW5w9WycMylnh5mG04T+8tA7DXUrblseN2lwHO/rlQcMYxNNsj6rKHg741/22cw DRlZoWsgGlhoCpG3MNXPgyHAfrC606otjBnYLHThY+jrk1pTSNZsRNmvgL89KgF2vQML IeIA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=iowsunUTmJwntdR3YFU0gAmm/r8u8IO/VZDPAXwpwfs=; b=HKW2SBA3GdY36Logk6u5l462hMlqKJXf+mmnQoTtezKVIDAs+Wp61JdFFrVV5bcPJF EW2db5mUBW3B5RE+AGxOkRYd4NT6gjXFFGYqg3rj2sZ9ZCvqnVQwcbMwBxSXmSFuOZTS B/7H77cX1dmlA9mXuRC3a1M/pOAD3STKEfMMfzR6kMiyTOYn5fb00UC4wtaCAmZiT/1y tP910ZKXeGWqSjzK8oZotFNu/hwRXav2xOWLY/bMF+oksfUckMuXhpxT/DjXDJSaWpnq 9pGequLl0KuICMAQpNzoP3rF9RbuhPL7LOzMw4MFBAg2XkuSAiKe2vZHokiP4b49lRu4 udHQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXJr/bNLCuXAmndx2emLIyXkOyxhzLb4689/crVlQXhOVotXNK25yrJRRFtLPQpImw== X-Received: by 10.129.87.81 with SMTP id l78mr26121825ywb.356.1484594015300; Mon, 16 Jan 2017 11:13:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.2.5] (adsl-65-0-121-9.jan.bellsouth.net. [65.0.121.9]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id t126sm10176083ywe.27.2017.01.16.11.13.34 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 16 Jan 2017 11:13:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Formally have Council oversee the Foundation 2.0 To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org References: <1604622.bZRWYHrp25@pinacolada> From: Dale Message-ID: Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2017 13:13:33 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:49.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/49.0 SeaMonkey/2.46 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 3b17286a-750b-4f78-ac8c-ede4fee7279c X-Archives-Hash: ac428c0a456fb64e2612dde5fb2db9ca Rich Freeman wrote: > On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 1:46 PM, Dale wrote: >> >> That's my thinking as well. If SPI can't be sued, then Gentoo or the top >> people still in and running Gentoo would be sued. > Of course SPI can be sued. If I want to sue SPI all I need to do is > go down to a courtroom and file some papers and pay a filing fee. > That's what suing somebody is. Now, if I don't have a reasonable > grounds for the lawsuit it might be quickly dismissed. > > Nobody could sue "Gentoo" under the SPI model because "Gentoo" would > not be a legal entity. They could certainly sue the "top people" in > it, as they can today. So nothing changes then. >> Let's say a dev did something that caused a lawsuit, say violated a >> copyright or something of that nature. Why would SPI defend that when SPI >> has no control over what the dev did? > If SPI was named in the lawsuit they would defend themselves. If they > weren't named in the lawsuit they wouldn't do anything. If the Gentoo > project (that is, a loose association of Gentoo developers who have no > legal existence) told SPI to pay their legal bills using Gentoo's > money, then they probably would do so. If SPI is named, they could file to be removed from the lawsuit which would then leave Gentoo on the hook. Again, what changes? >> The legal council they have seems to be used to keep SPI legal not >> the groups underneath them. > Certainly, but that is all that is needed. Not hardly. Just because SPI has its legal affairs in order does not mean the Gentoo people do. That would be when the lawsuit hits Gentoo not SPI. >> If a distro, whether it is Debian, Gentoo or >> someone else, violates someone else or breaks the law, they would have to >> defend themselves. > Certainly, though "Debian" is not a legal entity, so it has no need to > defend itself from a lawsuit, because you can't sue "Debian." Some > individuals associated with Debian could be sued, and they would have > to defend themselves from the lawsuit. However, they could only be > sued for things they're personally responsible for. > > If somebody wanted to sue "Debian" they would probably sue SPI, > because that is who is holding all of Debian's money. Presumably SPI > operates in such a manner as to make it hard to get it. > But SPI does not control Debian and what it does. It doesn't control its devs either. If one or more devs violate the law with or without it being common knowledge with other devs, SPI is not on the hook for that. Debian would be. The money would come from SPI but it would be Debian's donations paying it either with a court order or Debian telling SPI to do it. SPI wouldn't be sued because they had no control or say over what the devs did. I'm looking forward to seeing what Alec finds out about this. From what I've read on the SPI website, I don't think this is anything like you think it is. I think William has already been down this path and based on what I've read, I think William is right. Dale :-) :-)