Hi Jim, all, Jim Jagielski schreef: > > On Jun 8, 2011, at 5:53 PM, Simon Phipps wrote: > >> >> On 8 Jun 2011, at 23:49, Jim Jagielski wrote: >> >>> >>> On Jun 8, 2011, at 5:07 PM, Simon Brouwer wrote: >>> >>>> Op 6-6-2011 11:37, toki schreef: >>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>>>> Hash: SHA1 >>>>> >>>>> On 05/06/2011 15:00, Jim Jagielski wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> A formal, legal foundation. The ASF is a recognized 501(c)3, non- >>>>> TDF might not have 501(c)(3) status, but then consider that it is >>>>> incorporated in Germany, not the United States. >>>> That 501(c)(3) status aside, is TDF actually a legally established >>>> foundation (yet)? >>> >>> I also think that 'independent' is also an adjective that belongs >>> there... being independent is quite important to a number >>> of FOSS ecosystem people... >> >> While that is clearly a true statement, you seem to be implying that you >> don't think TDF is "independent". Please can you explain what you mean? > > People may just be curious about TDF being "backed" byFreies Office > Deutschland > e.V. as well as an associated project in Software in the Public Interest > (SPI). > What does being "backed" by them mean? How independent is it from these > 2 entitied? Just questions like that. > > Certainly being an independent, legally established foundation is > critical, isn't it, as compare to one which is "just" a legally > established one?
But is it even "just" a legally established foundation? AFAIK, TDF unto this day does not exist as a legal entity. That aside, I don't think there is any reason to doubt the independence of its community, steering committee etc. -- Vriendelijke groet, Simon Brouwer -*- nl.openoffice.org -*- http://www.opentaal.org -*- -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
