Re: "gr_rms" rejected but "Debian Project Leader 2021 Election" worked
You can shorten the lines of choices 3 & 5 and send the email through GMail. See your sent messages as to where the wrap happened. Best, Richard
Re: Appeal procedure for DAM actions
On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 12:48 AM Jonathan Wiltshire wrote: > I have the very highest regard for both Joerg's and Enrico's integrity. I > hope that they would say likewise about me. We are trying hard to do the > right thing and not the subvertible thing, so please have a little faith > that we are not designing this appeals process purely so we can game it in > our favour. At least from my perspective, this is not about anyone's integrity; your integrity is beyond doubt. Yet, processes should be somewhat resilient. This is especially true if they are executed seldomly, have extreme consequences, might challenged, or are likely to face increased public scrutiny. In this case, all of those apply. Once again, thank you to all parties involved who took it upon themselves to weather this mudslinging contest, best, Richard
Re: Appeal procedure for DAM actions
On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 11:27 AM Ulrike Uhlig wrote: [...] > Anthony Towns: [...] > > Having the boss's decision reviewed by people who report directly to > > the boss is kind of a dodgy structure; and people on the new member > > committee will probably want to maintain good relations with DAM, at > > least if they want to continue doing new member work. > > I cannot see a problem here. The vote of NMC will be secret, so there is > no way that DAM could know about who voted what. [...] > > (Another difference between the proposed process and court appeals is > > that appeals courts can provide detailed opinions as to why the original > > decision was wrong which helps avoid making the same mistakes in future; > > this process doesn't really have that feature). > There could be a _non-mandatory_ reasoning written by the NMC to DAM if > a decision is overturned. Those two are mutually exclusive. Assuming best case and that the text is piped through Secretary to avoid sender addresses: It would be an undue burden for dissenting NMC members to find each other in a truly secret ballot, let alone have them write something in a way which ensures DAM can't deduct from the style of writing, points raised, and timing who's among the set of people. Add that everyone in that group would know how many dissenting votes there were so you even know how many dissenters you would need to find. Richard
Re: Appeal procedure for DAM actions
On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 7:46 PM Kurt Roeckx wrote: > I don't intend to use devotee for that. I don't think it can > currently handle such votes, nor do I want to spend time > implementing that. I have used CIVS[1] for various projects and for work. It's not very polished, but usually works well. It's Condorcet and you can choose the completion rules, amongst other options. Richard [1] https://civs.cs.cornell.edu/
Re: similarities between logos for CLUSTER and Debian
On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 12:48 AM, Richard Hartmann richih.mailingl...@gmail.com wrote: * WANAL, but as we understand it the current situation already gives us a legal standing if we need it I have been asked to clarify. Long-term use gives us protection under Common Law. This is harder to defend in court if push comes to shove, but we would still have a _lot_ of precedent in our favour. Richard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/cad77+grfrv+sm-eyyxv7vz8kbixz65qr2rvedc_j+d0ad4x...@mail.gmail.com
Re: similarities between logos for CLUSTER and Debian
On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 9:46 AM, Yaroslav Halchenko deb...@onerussian.com wrote: On Sun, 04 Jan 2015, Paul R. Tagliamonte wrote: The debian swirl is trademarked, but freely licensed. I don't think so: http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=docstate=4803:q33o33.2.1 The mark consists of a spiral formed with the style of a paintbrush stroke with the word debian written. i.e. swirl on its own is not trademarked, thus could be freely used for other projects, thus all the reports from users on infringement through the years nearly always lead to relax, everything is alright response ;) Yaroslav contacted us at trademark@ and we wanted to clear up any confusion: * The currently trademarked logo is swirl with debian written below it - the word debian _is_ part of said trademark. This was not our intention, but due to confusion in the legal and administrative ether, that's what happened. What we understood to be a procedural request for clarification led the USPTO to change the specimen we wanted to register. When we realized this, it was too late to change much. Legal advice was to let it run through and _not_ try to change anything at that point * Yes, we are filing for swirl only on its own as well * Once we have swirl only, we will look at if International registrations via the Madrid Protocol * WANAL, but as we understand it the current situation already gives us a legal standing if we need it As these processes are slow as molasses... please bear with us. Also, if you have a usage request, question, or a notice of infringement, please poke us at trademark@ or at least CC us. Richard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/cad77+grau0exnhnz2gtwxqh1zsfgreuynqeqh4ek3h5h-vm...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Reminder: Removing 2048 bit keys from the Debian keyrings
On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 8:25 PM, Marco d'Itri m...@linux.it wrote: So the plan is that the beatings will continue until morale improves? Interpretation is in the eye of the bee holder, but I am considering to attach this list to my weekly bug report; mainly because I can. Richard PS: If not for the deadline in less than two months, quarantining the keys which have not been used for two years or more would be prudent today. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/cad77+gslp27kgbk6pkamce0xzzb8wwv59pjwrxuffwb3xax...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Reminder: Removing 2048 bit keys from the Debian keyrings
On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 10:11 PM, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh h...@debian.org wrote: Wouldn't it make more sense to ask these people privately what is getting in the way of a switch to a stronger key? That seems to have happened in similar form a few times already; given the context, it's reasonable to expect them to poke -project, -private, or just anyone on their own. Richard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/CAD77+gQKKRujTin0shy5JMzKk+EF8=b4d5ctii3lgukcsvy...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Trusted Organisation status for DebConf15's legal entity
Dear all, is there anything more I can (or need to) do? Thanks, RIchard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/CAD77+gT1ys4qxUj4dNf3ng=sohb267c5bf5muwathhqawty...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Trusted Organisation status for DebConf15's legal entity
Dear all, just for the record, we incorporated ourselves on May 3rd as planned; the official name is DebConf Deutschland e.V.. Work to be granted the status of non-profit is well under way. All seven founding members (the legally required minimum) are DDs and we all agree that we will keep the member count to the functional minimum; changes in intent away from Debian's best interest are thus virtually impossible. The founding members are: * Michael Banck * Rene Engelhard * Richard Hartmann (chairman of the board) * Philipp Hug * Jörg Jaspert (vice chairman) * Martin Krafft (treasurer) * Margarita Manterola Of note in TO context is that: * Philipp Hug is a member of the Debian Auditor team (pending official delegation) and has agreed help keep an eye on the monetary side of the e.V. * Jörg Jaspert is a vice president of SPI, a Trusted Organi[s,z]ation As far as I can see, all concerns have been addressed, many of them above and beyond what was required. The two week discussion period has also passed Richard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/cad77+gskeequ0ewomvgfc+kedw-lkg+xz6zpdkpas4ns4nh...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Trusted Organisation status for DebConf15's legal entity
On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 7:53 AM, Lucas Nussbaum lea...@debian.org wrote: As you already described how you met the TO criteria in cad77+gqwz0opgzi2qsgre3y3vbungtg6b4beqtcqbrz-wjh...@mail.gmail.com, I think that we can safely say that the minimum two weeks discussion period started on 2014-04-26 (and thus ends on 2014-05-11). Works for me. Just to make sure: This means that unless someone raises objections, we can expect you to rubberstamp our status (and tell us what, if anything, else we need to do at that time?) From the docs, the last step is not entirely clear to me, but it really seems to be as simple as you saying they are TO, please add to your list and sending to auditor@ Thanks, Richard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/cad77+gqp7i_4yuclee1gatxd2pxfqnssn00nqhvgayhm+j_...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Trusted Organisation status for DebConf15's legal entity
On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 11:03 AM, Lucas Nussbaum lea...@debian.org wrote: The last step was never used so far AFAIK. But it could probably be implemented as a d-d-a email providing the updated list of TOs, and a page on the Debian website listing TOs and referencing the d-d-a email. (Similar to delegations and https://www.debian.org/intro/organization) Re-reading everything, I think the proper way is for you to ask auditor@ to update the list of TOs. It would make sense for auditor@ (or you) to follow delegation templates. Richard PS: FWIW, they are maintaining TOs in the wiki, but a real page may be even better. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/CAD77+gQLW0byB9gMWYYsLH9=-w1qrmv1gcwzwkwq8ww-rch...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Trusted Organisation status for DebConf15's legal entity
Dear all, as announced some time ago, we will incorporate DebConfDeutschland e.V. tomorrow. All founding members will be DDs with the full list being sent as a reply to this email after the fact. Given that: * We will not be using the name Debian * We are not planning to run for more than necessary for DC15 We would like to know: * If we need TO status * Assuming yes, what the next steps are Thanks, Richard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/CAD77+gQusa8a+aXRnsmX3-KSjYKb_reM0y6n=ccw3zu6nhr...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Trusted Organisation status for DebConf15's legal entity
On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 10:09 PM, Lucas Nussbaum lea...@debian.org wrote: So I'm not against considering the idea of keep the DC15 TO after DC15, but this will clearly have to be weighted against the disadvantages of this option. We decided to go with a single-use eV for DebConf15, because: * of the valid points aba raised wrt taxes * of the discussion about the name and concerns from various parties * we value moving quickly and without (too much) resistance over a mere name Please note that the by-laws may not reflect this directly for legal reasons. Richard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/CAD77+gS7aUUSS-0G=XTOji07Stxne7mA7VVNBZXqY=6rz6r...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Trusted Organisation status for DebConf15's legal entity
On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 9:56 PM, Lucas Nussbaum lea...@debian.org wrote: I personally think that this could be enough, but would welcome more opinions on that. Same and same. We would appreciate more feedback on this (and on when silence will be interpreted as implicit consensus). Richard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/cad77+gqni6d2msqunupl8uuychsar46scinbjl4snddwr_y...@mail.gmail.com
Trusted Organisation status for DebConf15's legal entity
Dear all, the German local team for DebConf15 is in the process of incorporating itself. We need a legal shell for signing contracts, taking in donations, and for insurance reasons. Plus, we are expecting to gain non-profit status which means tax exemption and thus more money for making DebConf15 better. Before anyone raises this point: Yes, we tried contacting[1] FFIS, but they have not even answered in more than four weeks; we are not confident that they would be more reactive going forward and do not consider them an option any more. At Lucas' request, we are aiming to become a Debian Trusted Organisation[2]. As Lucas asked for our timeframe: We will be meeting in person[3] on 2014-05-03 and would like to officially found the organisation at that time. We do not have the time for long deliberations as our option with the venue will lapse if we wait too long with signing contracts and as we need the legal entity as contractual partner. This could result in increased cost for DebConf, and thus less travel sponsorship. Of course, we will need to have decided upon a name by then. The three options are: * Debian Deutschland e.V. * DebConf Deutschland e.V. * DebConf15 Deutschland e.V. From our understanding, German tax authorities don't like throw-away/single-use non-profit organisations, but we have no proof of that, so please speak up if you have experience. Also, at least Ganneff and me would be willing to carry on the e.V. after DebConf15 if this is deemed useful to Debian. Given FFIS' performance (the above isn't a one-time event only, it's been this way for a long time), this seems likely. Also, having Debian in the name can help with finding sponsors. Within the trademark team, Brian Gupta, Joe Healy, Lucas Nussbaum, and myself are working on an actual policy for granting the Debian trademark as part of a legal name; as of right now the policy draft could be summarized as needs to be a TO, trademark team does verification, and DPL needs to agree explictly. Also, as TO, we would be handling Debian's money in the context of DebConf15 and potentially afterwards. All that being said, our answers to the requirements[4], including feedback to questions from Lucas are: 1. The organization should share Debian's general visions We are almost entirely made up of DDs, most of us have had Debian in our lifes for more than a decade. We agree with the Social Contract, the DFSG, and the Debian Constitution. Confirmed attendance[3] of potential[5] founding members: Andi Mundt Arne Wichmann Christian T. Steigies Franziska Lichtblau Hannes von Haugwitz Joerg Jaspert Margarita Manterola Martin Krafft Maximiliano Curia Michael Banck Penny Krafft Rene Engelhard Richard Hartmann Sandro Knaus Unconfirmed attendance: Constanze Stohn Philipp Hug Sebastian Harl 2. The organization should remain loyal to Debian See 1. Going against Debian's best interest now or in the future would not only be stupid beyond description, it would also wipe out our collective reputations and remove the common cause that unites us as DebConf15 team members. At Lucas' request, we are working with our German lawyer to add something like board members must be DDs or similar into our constitution, but this will be a non-trivial legal construct, especially given that the Verein (association) is legally required to be an independent legal entity whose highest decision-making body is the members' assembly. Therefore, it'll be really hard to codify external influence as requested. For the German tax office, it'll be a stretch to bestow authority to an international formation such as Debian, and we certainly want to avoid having to explain what Debian is and how we make decisions. Whether we can make this happen or not: the board needs to approve new members before they can join and thus vote anyway. As a consequence, hostile take-over is very unlikely. We would _highly_ appreciate knowledgeable and legally-sound input on this. If you are a German lawyer or can get one to make a statement in their capacity as a lawyer, do speak up! We are also in the process of finding out what, if any, other TOs have similar constructs in place. As those are mostly in other jurisdictions, we are not sure if any constructs can be cloned over to Germany. Input from Lucas if he considers this an optional extra or a requirement would also be useful. 3. The organization should provide accountability on assets held in trust At a minimum, we will create yearly accounts and share this data with Debian Auditors and anyone else the DPL deems useful. Upon request of the Debian Auditors, we will provide current balance and other information. We do ask Auditors not to request too much information during the high phase of DebConf15, though. 4. The organization should be reliable, sustainable, and reactive We think we proved how quickly we operate. Many of us hold other positions of trust. As to sustainability, we are not entirely sure about the long-term
Re: Trusted Organisation status for DebConf15's legal entity
On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 12:29 AM, Andreas Barth a...@ayous.org wrote: I'm running some throw-away non-profit organisations, and have not experienced problems. Have the tax authorities been made aware of this in advance? For how long are those organisations running? Debconf has a different tax situation than a normal TO setup (especially given the amount of money might bring us into VAT if we like it or not), so keeping those apart has some advantages to reduce long-term overhead. I fail to see how, please expand. Also, having that seperated, reduces the risks from debconf on normal debian assets. For this reason, I would recommend to have a throw-away legal entity for debconf, and independendly form a debian-owned legal umbrella in Germany. As this organisation will not hold non-DebConf Debian money or other assets at first anyway, I do not see any risk. And even if it does, I am still not sure what the actual risks would be unless you assume we will run DebConf15 deep into red figures. You can use that name independend of how the legal umbrella is named. One of my legal umbrellas is named Trägerverein HST, but runs the brand Horber Schienen-Tage. This naming has not caused any issues. The relation between Debconf, the Debconf15 e.V. and Debian would be similar - related but not the same letters. We are aware of that and would still use the name Debian in our correspondence. Yet, some of us (me included) think this sends a stronger message, increasing the potential for donations. Thanks for your input, Richard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/cad77+grp5kso6c-c2wtaqmrwg9hion5pt4+oxbnmerp1+gh...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Possible trademark violation?
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 9:12 PM, Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo manuel.montez...@gmail.com wrote: I don't know if this kind of reports is useful (probably one can find many such things just with a few searches in your favourite engine, so isolate reports like this are not very interesting?); or if this is the better place for them, but well, just thought that I should share it just in case. It's useful and we will have a look at it. Worst that can happen is we look at it, everything's OK and we document the fact. In this specific case, gut reaction is that it's not OK... Thanks for the report! Richard Debian Trademark Team -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/cad77+gqgouswwwe80t9jk8ot9juklz7wgsakym5wkuoqbkq...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Possible trademark violation?
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 9:13 PM, Paul Tagliamonte paul...@debian.org wrote: A google search for: debian it results in this link as the top hit. I'm cc'ing trademarks. JFTR, it's the fourth hit for me, but Google's filter bubble is a filter bubble.. Richard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAD77+gRR5iAC=+vqst+ojrx-nz9etoinlys4patbyec-yly...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Answers to questions raised about registering the Debian Logo as our trademark
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 6:38 AM, Brian Gupta brian.gu...@brandorr.com wrote: 4) What is the impact of registering in the US only? A: We would still only have Common law protection in those countries we don't register the logo. We'd gain no benefit in those jurisdictions, but it wouldn't hurt us either. However, being that getting a registration in the US is a prerequisite for applying for international registration, this is largely an academic distinction. As an additional data point, all the modified logos and other weird uses that are currently logged have been outside the US. Richard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/cad77+gre7f8-xacug6sw_0atpqa7pfmvklbxlnnu8ebaate...@mail.gmail.com
Re: FOSDEM videos released
On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 18:09, Holger Levsen hol...@layer-acht.org wrote: So a short reply (I'll post this to d-d-a with reply-to set to -project) will be very much appreciated! :) Same as Martin James. I know I can skip Debian talks if they clash with other stuff as I know the room will be crowded and the video quality is the best of Fosdem. As I could not attend this year due to my damn ankle, I am even more happy (happier?) about the Debian room videos. Richard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
