En r�ponse � Mark Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > At 10:47 AM 7/15/02, you wrote: > >I agree it should be a separate foundation. > > > >But I am not sure that the crypto face is a flaw to it. Even if 50% > of > >developments are crypto-related, project like adaptation of kernel or > distro > >for govt needs change it all. Donations can be for a specific project > (like > >you said). > > AFAIK according to the current law, donations cannot be designated. Now > I > believe this is to allow the charity to take extra money from one > project > in put it in another without consent from the benefactor. >
Humm.... what about the coop model then with R&D credits. That might be more viable still because I think corp/govt (people with big money) want specific projects to move on. Instead of being donator who benefits from tax credits. It is the projects' worker who benefits directly from R&D tax credits. That's lowering the price of sponsors (instead of donators) for sure. Again, it might looks like it is not CLUE related anymore but I think it is the best way to promote free software within Canada and also the best way to participate to Canada economy. This is assuming that U in CLUE stand for Users including companies and corporations. Regards Richard --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
