Re: [Debian-uk] Mini-DebConf in Cambridge, UK - November 5-8 2015
On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 03:24:03PM +0100, Paul Waring wrote: >On 14/09/15 15:08, Steve McIntyre wrote: >> I'm also hoping to find sponsors again to cover some other costs for >> the conference for things like food - please contact me if you can >> help! > >I probably can't justify the cost of attending, but I'm happy to chip in >£100 towards sponsoring the event and have it go towards whatever you >feel is appropriate (food, speaker expenses etc.) Hi Paul! Thanks for your awesome offer of sponsorship! I've deliberately hung back before replying to see what I could come up with in terms of corporate sponsorship offers first. I'd rather spend company money in preference, and leave Debian users with their money for important things like beer if I can... :-) As it happens, I *have* received enough offers to cover all the costs we're expecting for the miniconf (see the page if you're interested!) so you don't need to help us. But please accept my heart-felt gratitude for the offer in any case - it's really appreciated! -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.st...@einval.com Into the distance, a ribbon of black Stretched to the point of no turning back
Re: [Debian-uk] Mini-DebConf in Cambridge, UK - November 5-8 2015
On 14/09/15 15:08, Steve McIntyre wrote: > I'm also hoping to find sponsors again to cover some other costs for > the conference for things like food - please contact me if you can > help! I probably can't justify the cost of attending, but I'm happy to chip in £100 towards sponsoring the event and have it go towards whatever you feel is appropriate (food, speaker expenses etc.) Paul [not on debian-project so please CC me if replying] -- Paul Waring Freelance consultant http://www.pwaring.com
Re: [Debian-uk] Mini-Debconf in Cambridge, UK - November 14-17 2013
Hello All If it ok to paste that link into twitter/facebook etc to promote it? I can't make the event but can big it up a bit :) Paul On 16 August 2013 14:19, Steve McIntyre st...@einval.com wrote: Hi! I'm organising a mini-conf in Cambridge for November this year. My employer ARM has graciously volunteered to host people for 4 days for a mix of sprint sessions and talks: * 2 days for a mini-DebCamp (Thu 14 - Fri 15), with space for dedicated development / sprint / team meetings for up to 40 people * 2 days for a more regular mini-conf (Sat 16 - Sun 17) with space for more general talks, up to 100 people and I'm hoping to find sponsors to cover some other costs for the conference for things like food. I'm expecting that we will end up discussing and working on the new arm64 port and other ARM-related topics at the very least, but there's obviously also scope for other subjects for sprint work and talks. For more details and to sign up to attend, please visit the wiki page at https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/Miniconf-UK/2013 I look forwards to seeing lots of you in November! -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. st...@einval.com ___ Debian-uk maillist - debian...@chiark.greenend.org.uk http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/debian-uk
Re: [Debian-uk] Mini-Debconf in Cambridge, UK - November 14-17 2013
On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 02:23:24PM +0100, Paul Mellors wrote: Hello All If it ok to paste that link into twitter/facebook etc to promote it? I can't make the event but can big it up a bit :) Of course, yes please! -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.st...@einval.com Because heaters aren't purple! -- Catherine Pitt -- 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/20130816142735.gg26...@einval.com
Re: [Debian-uk] Mini-Debconf in Cambridge, UK - November 14-17 2013
Hi, On 16 August 2013 15:23, Paul Mellors prjmell...@gmail.com wrote: I'm organising a mini-conf in Cambridge for November this year. My employer ARM has graciously volunteered to host people for 4 days for a mix of sprint sessions and talks: For more details and to sign up to attend, please visit the wiki page at https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/Miniconf-UK/2013 I look forwards to seeing lots of you in November! Should I book my flight already? :) -- WBR, Andrew -- 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/cacujmdpzced8jyw--iojdar6h_qwjf3ooehgq6az-zvrtbz...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Debian UK (was Re: What the DFSG really says about trademarks)
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [DUS expenses] Ok. I certainly wouldn't call items for sale a case of spending on itself, though; and at least in the US, I suspect these expenses might be accounted for in a somewhat different fashion than the breakdown given above. (But perhaps someone with more accounting experience than I could check me on that.) In the UK, they'd probably appear differently on a balance sheet too. Are you looking at the accounts for information, or to fill out a form, though? [...] Well, looking through http://www.charity-commision.gov.uk/, I can't actually find anything that spells out how the UK decides whether a stated object is charitable, but I also definitely don't see anything in their example objects that would cover SPI's charter. Education is one of SPI's stated objectives, yes, but advocacy is also, and it's my impression that advocacy is off-limits for UK charities. Bluntly: why does that impression matter? I've encountered many prejudices about charities, some of which are incorrect. There is a rather fuzzy benefit of the community charity heading, which is often under review. They also change what counts as political (which isn't allowed for charities). Explicitly trying to support or defeat legislation seems clearly political, but more general direction of society to be helpful (or charitable?) is sometimes allowed. The only way to decide for sure seems to be to apply to the commissioners, and a court if necessary beyond that. In many circumstances, law says groups must apply for a decision, but DUS won't and I'm not sure whether the call reported in http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/pipermail/debian-uk/2005-August/010548.html really happened or was a joke like much of the rest of that mail. Best wishes, -- MJ Ray (slef), K. Lynn, England, email see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[OT] MJ Ray's continued burbling (was Re: Debian UK ....)
MJ Ray wrote: [...] In many circumstances, law says groups must apply for a decision, but DUS won't and I'm not sure whether the call reported in http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/pipermail/debian-uk/2005-August/010548.html really happened or was a joke like much of the rest of that mail. Why do you think that mail was a joke? The only hint I can find would be the smile I attributed to the person I was talking to at the charity commission. Perhaps you don't get to experience many people smiling while they're in conversation with you, and so cannot conceive of the concept, but since she was laughing when she asked if she could join the Debian UK Society I thought it only right to report that with a smiley INSIDE THE QUOTES. The rest of the mail, in which I address all the complaints, whinges, and unfounded assertions I could find in your previous deluge of mails certainly wasn't meant to be jovial. The fact that you feel the need to dismiss any criticism as a joke is rather revealing. Cheers, Phil. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Philip Hands's continued messenger-shoot, was: [OT] MJ Ray's continued burbling (was Re: Debian UK ....)
Philip Hands [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why do you think that mail was a joke? [...] The poor attempt at telepathy, claiming someone said BTW and :-) then rounding off by confirming that a constitution is required if you ask for a bank account type that requires a constitution (and exclude other bank account types by the question's wording). Perhaps you don't get to experience many people smiling while they're in conversation with you, [...] Perhaps you only do character assassination when trying to ignore a sensitive issue. The fact that you feel the need to dismiss any criticism as a joke is rather revealing. Again, a claim of empathic ability fails dismally. Are you upset that you contradicted your own assertion that DUS doesn't hold personal details? -- MJ Ray (slef) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
Scripsit Rich Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] If that organisation operates for a period of time, then a court would need convincing that the members were not jointly and severally liable for the liabilities of that organisation. I get more and more happy that I moved out of that country. -- Henning Makholm En tapper tinsoldat. En dame i spagat. Du er en lykkelig mand ... -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 10:40:23PM +0100, Rich Walker wrote: In the UK, VAT registration is *required* if you are in business[1] and your 12-month *turnover* exceeds £6. Probably this is not an issue for this organisation at present. VAT registration isn't the one you need to worry about. Debian-UK isn't going to be shifting that much money in a hurry. Corporation Tax is the one to worry about. The limit for that is only £10,000 per financial year. I just ran a few quick projections based on the reports in the [EMAIL PROTECTED] archives, and it's reasonably likely that it'll be over that limit next year, given the current rate of growth in sales. It might be over this year, that's hard to predict. Corporation Tax also applies to members associations, clubs and societies at the same rate as for registered companies. Basically any group of two or more people that handles money and isn't a charity is going to have to pay Corporation Tax; HMRC's definition of company is anything that owes us money and isn't an individual citizen. Corporation Tax requires annual tax returns and notification that the company exists, and HMRC is going to come along and audit anything as weird as Debian-UK fairly quickly, so the accounts had better be in order, backdated six years. Failure to file the tax returns in a timely manner results in a fine of £100/£200 plus 10%/20% of the unpaid tax, depending on how untimely you are. Failure to have your accounts in order when they audit results in HMRC conducting an autopsy of the company. It may also require a tax return to be filed for years when the association is below the limit. I'm not sure about that. If it does, the same penalties apply. Ask a chartered accountant. And those penalties can probably be applied against any members, since it's not incorporated with limits on liability. Bugger. -- .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield : :' : http://www.debian.org/ | `. `' | `- -- | signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian UK
Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 10:40:23PM +0100, Rich Walker wrote: In the UK, VAT registration is *required* if you are in business[1] and your 12-month *turnover* exceeds £6. Probably this is not an issue for this organisation at present. VAT registration isn't the one you need to worry about. Debian-UK isn't going to be shifting that much money in a hurry. Corporation Tax is the one to worry about. The limit for that is only £10,000 per financial year. I just ran a few quick projections based on the reports in the [EMAIL PROTECTED] archives, and it's reasonably likely that it'll be over that limit next year, given the current rate of growth in sales. It might be over this year, that's hard to Well spotted, that man. predict. Corporation Tax also applies to members associations, clubs and societies at the same rate as for registered companies. Basically any group of two or more people that handles money and isn't a charity is going to have to pay Corporation Tax; HMRC's definition of company is anything that owes us money and isn't an individual citizen. Corporation Tax requires annual tax returns and notification that the company exists, and HMRC is going to come along and audit anything as weird as Debian-UK fairly quickly, so the accounts had better be in order, backdated six years. Failure to file the tax returns in a timely manner results in a fine of £100/£200 plus 10%/20% of the unpaid tax, depending on how untimely you are. Failure to have your accounts in order when they audit results in HMRC conducting an autopsy of the company. I assume that someone is even now writing a quick script to import the historical accounts into sql-ledger (which does a pretty good job of it) so the previous years reports can be produced on demand? It may also require a tax return to be filed for years when the association is below the limit. I'm not sure about that. If it does, the same penalties apply. Ask a chartered accountant. And those penalties can probably be applied against any members, since it's not incorporated with limits on liability. Incorporate a company limited by guarantee, rather than a company limited by shares. (Avoids the whole shareholder issue; and they're expected to be a bit weird). Bugger. No, that's what the taxman might do. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 12:30:39AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote: Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This doesn't strike me as much different than loads of other inon-profit associations (maybe thisis a frenchisism though ?) do in all legallity, and i see nothing there which really involves trademark or our attitude with regard commercial distributions. The debian trademark policy says no businesses get to use the mark. Why should this selling association, which ignores good practice, get a swift exception, while Ian Murdock's development association gets referred for negotiations? Because, quite simply, they are not a business, at least in the sense that was meant at the above. I mean, take LinuxTag for example, there where guys there at the debian booth selling t-shirts and stuff, don't know the detail, but nobody bashed them for doing business in debian name, and i believe as long as the money is not given out to share-holders, but is for debian (either as plain donation, or expensed for debian related stuff, like stock renewal and the ocassional yearly party), then everything is fine and you are just silly in claiming the contrary. There is no relationship whatsoever in the core thingy, or the other debian derived distros. And BTW, anyway, does the debian trademark extend to textile and such ? Or is it only restricted to software products ? From my overview of this discussion, it is just a petty person dispute between the in people and the out ones, More like the in people and the also-in ones ;-) Well, a petty person dispute nontheless. [...] (altough i guess any court would take the reasonable approach over the opt-out thingy, and not make those co-opted members liable, but IANAL). First, I'd rather not take that risk in this climate. Any juridicial system, where you get assigned responsability like that without attending the AGM and signing in is probably worthless. I doubt the UK judicial system is in this case though. Second, what would happen to Debian's money if Debian UK's constitution is found not to stand up in court? What'd happen to debian's reputation? We'd look like a bunch of clowns who can't run one of the simplest business structures! As opposed to a bunch of clowns who expose their petty disputes on the public plaza :) So, go solv your internal and interpersonal affairs between yourselves, or bring some more real problems here that warrant this long flamewar :) I'm willing to discuss and I've been plain about the walk-away points, but there's no sign of DUS movement. This problem needs more attention and it would've been better if it came from debian supporters here, rather than the alternatives. Sorry. Well, you have hardly been resaonable in some of your points, so i believe there is some understanding in them not wanting to speak with you or whatever. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 01:50:30AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote: Henning Makholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Scripsit MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] [...] As previously argued, DUS is an enterprise generating income from commercial sale of goods - a business. More assertions. Assertions? That DUS is an enterprise? What exactly is this DUS thingy you are all speaking about ? Is it the same as Debian-UK under another name, or something else ? If you insist on spamming the whole world with this, at least provide good context. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 12:30:11AM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: Businesses are not inherently evil but they do have different priorities than Debian. I don't follow debian-uk and it certainly doesn't sound like it's actually been resolved in an acceptable way regardless. It's somewhat worth pointing out that Mark has something of a reputation for inter-personal friction. The probability of the situation being resolved to his satisfaction is small, but (to the absolute best of my knowledge) he's the only UK-based developer to have raised any serious objection to the way things have been handled so far. If I thought interpersonal friction was the only issue, I wouldn't bother continuing to follow this thread. The fact is, MJ has raised a number of specific concerns that I agree Debian should come to terms with if DUS is going to be using the Debian name. The salient questions seem to be: - Why does the DUS have an opt-out model for DD membership in the org (if this is indeed the case)? - Should an organization that uses the Debian name be selling merchandise, or should sales be kept at arm's length from the task of holding funds on behalf of Debian? - Should an organization that uses the Debian name be directly accountable to the DPL or other Debian project leadership for how it spends Debian money? and more generally, - What *should* Debian's policy be on the use of the Debian name by affiliate groups? Simply using the argument Debian's legal entity doesn't sell things, therefore no closely associated entity should sell things either isn't very convincing - it's more worthwhile to look at /why/ SPI doesn't engage in any commercial activities. Agreed. b) It impairs competition (the leading Linux CD manufacturers in the UK supply us with the CDs that get sold, and certainly don't seem to be complaining) Well, I'm not sure that's much of a counterargument. Just because DUS has chosen as partners companies that are a) leaders in their field and b) happy with the arrangement doesn't mean that its CD sales have zero impact on *others* that might be trying to sell CDs, does it? Not that I have a problem with Steve, Phil, and the others either buying or selling CDs, but we should consider whether it's appropriate to be selling them under the name Debian UK Society. Maybe it doesn't a damn bit of difference, though -- whether it's DUS, or Phil and Steve, they're obviously going to be sold at the Debian booth, so the name endorsement is already there, right? Is it inappropriate for an organisation that is closely linked to Debian and which uses the Debian name to engage in any form of commercial activity? Does the answer to this depend on whether it's for profit or not? I think it would be inappropriate for anyone *other than Debian* to profit from sales using our name. Heck, last I checked, the logo policy doesn't even allow DDs to sell Debian clothing at a profit. I don't know how I feel about not-for-profit sales using the Debian name, but I think that's one of the questions that's been put to us... -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian UK
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And BTW, anyway, does the debian trademark extend to textile and such ? Or is it only restricted to software products ? I don't think it does, which may be the reason for the non-free logo. DUS (the _D_ebian _U_K _S_ociety... debian-uk is a mailing list I'm happy to be on) is also selling software and I think deliberately naming your organisation with someone else's trademark is generally bad practice. [...] Any juridicial system, where you get assigned responsability like that without attending the AGM and signing in is probably worthless. I doubt the UK judicial system is in this case though. Quite so! Freedom of association is a basic principle. I hope DUS's membership assertion wouldn't work as a couple of people have suggested, but I'd prefer not the risk of court time to have that confirmed if something goes wrong. Involuntary membership does exist and that's usually mentioned in legislation: student unions do it under the terms of the Education Act 1994. I think the few involuntary membership groups I know are incorporated, which limits liability. (I feel some of DUS wrote the constitution as if it was part of a student union and missed out some necessary features.) [...] you have hardly been resaonable in some of your points, so i believe there is some understanding in them not wanting to speak with you or whatever. Can you give examples, please? Off-list is fine. Thanks, -- MJR/slef -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] in my vocabulary not-for-profit business is an oxymoron? OK. So, for example, http://www.createuk.com/ isn't a business to you? If not, I think your definition is a bit unusual. Best wishes, -- MJ Ray (slef), K. Lynn, England, email see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
Scripsit MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] Henning Makholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is DUS's involuntary membership even legal? I don't know. Which law would prevent them from giving you a vote in their matters? How would you enforce such a law? [...] You moved slickly from membership to whether one has a vote. That's the only thing membership *means* when there are no dues to pay. -- Henning Makholm Hører I. Kald dem sammen. Så mange som overhovedet muligt. Jeg siger jer det her er ikke bare stort. Det er Stortstortstort. Det er allerhelvedes stort. Det er historiEN.
Re: Debian UK
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 09:38:35AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote: Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] in my vocabulary not-for-profit business is an oxymoron? OK. So, for example, http://www.createuk.com/ isn't a business to you? CREATE is a charity and social business based in Speke in Liverpool. No, doesn't look like a business to me. They seem to use the term social business throughout, which is not a term I've ever heard in en_US, and in any case *they* seem to think it's important enough of a distinction that they never refer to themselves as a plain business, always as a *social* business. If not, I think your definition is a bit unusual. I think my definition is the standard one in en_US. Thus, I think it would be in the interest of clear communication to avoid use of the word business here when referring to not-for-profit organizations. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian UK
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 01:50:30AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote: Henning Makholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Scripsit MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] [...] As previously argued, DUS is an enterprise generating income from commercial sale of goods - a business. More assertions. Assertions? That DUS is an enterprise? What exactly is this DUS thingy you are all speaking about ? Is it the same as Debian-UK under another name, or something else ? DUS - Debian UK Society. I'm sure this was obvious from a previous post. Thanks, - -- Brett Parker web: http://www.sommitrealweird.co.uk/ email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDHq+kEh8oWxevnjQRAm0qAJ0XhM0bdfhZl+t+qeqykD7CIo8OhgCgxoQO mweVBstniZMvc2tqj+Z6pw0= =tMnB -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
Henning Makholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Scripsit MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] You moved slickly from membership to whether one has a vote. That's the only thing membership *means* when there are no dues to pay. Being part of an unincorporated association has other implications. Debating whether they are meaningful is uninteresting and irrelevant. DUS could hold wider votes without claiming involuntary membership. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
Henning Makholm wrote: Scripsit MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] Henning Makholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is DUS's involuntary membership even legal? I don't know. Which law would prevent them from giving you a vote in their matters? How would you enforce such a law? [...] You moved slickly from membership to whether one has a vote. That's the only thing membership *means* when there are no dues to pay. In the _many_ criticisms that MJ Ray has rolled out recently, this is one of the few that holds any water IMO, but as Henning has correctly spotted, the intent was to allow a vote to any DD who lives in the UK, unless they stated that they didn't want to be involved. On reflection, I think we should ensure that the wording makes it clear that one has to express an interest in membership in order to be considered a member. I'll start a thread to that effect back on the debian-uk list. Cheers, Phil. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Debian UK (was Re: What the DFSG really says about trademarks)
On Fri, Sep 02, 2005 at 06:38:38PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote: and it does not engage in any lucrative activities of which the society itself is a benefactor, seeing that revenue from CD sales is donated to Debian. DUS spends on itself, which is necessary in its current setup. From the last three treasurer's reports: DUS expenses: Items for sale 1718.00 Lunch at show22.82 Photocopying 0.73 Debian expenses: DPL expenses230.37 buildd hardware 135.14 Ok. I certainly wouldn't call items for sale a case of spending on itself, though; and at least in the US, I suspect these expenses might be accounted for in a somewhat different fashion than the breakdown given above. (But perhaps someone with more accounting experience than I could check me on that.) In any case, we evidently do at least have some 23 GBP in non-Debian-approved expenditures over the course of three months. That doesn't seem like an unreasonable amount of overhead, though I guess some may object that lunch at show is not an appropriate *kind* of expenditure. I can't tell, myself; I don't have any strong feelings about what the guidelines should be that govern such things. So the society is certainly a /corporation/, but if it's a business it's a piss-poor one. A corporation is a legal person which can own stuff itself and so on. DUS is an unincorporated association and not a corporation. Ah, so it's an unincorporated society at that. Yes, I can certainly understand the concerns about liability, then. (Likewise, SPI is a corporation, but not a business; and from what I understand of such things, SPI could also not be considered a charity under UK law.) Why not, just out of interest? It seems to act for the benefit of the community and I didn't notice any obvious exclusion. Well, looking through http://www.charity-commision.gov.uk/, I can't actually find anything that spells out how the UK decides whether a stated object is charitable, but I also definitely don't see anything in their example objects that would cover SPI's charter. Education is one of SPI's stated objectives, yes, but advocacy is also, and it's my impression that advocacy is off-limits for UK charities. In general, I think a group now should be called debian only if: 1. it's a debian subproject, OR 2. it's a local charity and got consensus BEFORE trading, OR 3. it's outside the scope of trademark infringement, because these things have big potential to reflect on debian. 1 offers debian some influence, 2 should ensure minimal good governance and debian influence and 3 we can't do much about. Why should *charities* get special consideration, anyway? Being a charity doesn't automatically make them aligned with Debian's goals. Indeed, which is why debian should reach consensus before they trade. I think charities should get some special consideration because law enforces some level of openness and honour not required of other organisations. Well, charities (as a category legally distinct from non-profits) don't exist in my jurisdiction, so I'm rather disinclined to use that as a standard. AFAICT, such a standard would actually equate to the British government says it's a charity, which doesn't do anyone in other countries a bit of good. If there are specific, jurisdiction-independent features of UK charities which you consider important, perhaps we should be discussing those instead. I think any local org using the Debian name should be accountable to the DPL for the use of that name, if that's what you mean by being a Debian subproject; but then, a simple revocable trademark license seems to wholly achieve that. By debian subproject, I mean one of the things that follows the general ideas of: 1. announcement and open discussion before its creation; 2. voluntary participation of debian developers; 3. support from some other key debian groups; and 4. accountable to the wider project; which are mostly outlined in the draft subproject howto. Ok. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian UK
* Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: It seems to me they are selling t-shirts and whatever and the result of that money serves to buy more t-shirts and stuff, is donated to debian as UK-based money when asked by the DPL/SPI/whoever, and occasionally serves to pay beer for the anual barbeque or whatever. This doesn't strike me as much different than loads of other inon-profit associations (maybe thisis a frenchisism though ?) do in all legallity, and i see nothing there which really involves trademark or our attitude with regard commercial distributions. I do believe there are non-profits out there which do exactly this. This issue is about doing it using Debian's name (the trademark issue) and attempting to appear as part of Debian (the non-commercial issue). If DUS/Debian-UK is really the UK branch of Debian then it needs to act as Debian does and be non-commercial. If it's not the UK branch of Debian then it shouldn't be calling itself Debian-UK and shouldn't be accepting donations and holding money on behalf of Debian. What makes it even worse is that on debian.org websites we claim to not sell products yet at the *Debian* booth at whichever UK expos DUS goes to we *are* selling products. It seems pretty likely that the sponsored booth is in Debian's name, either explicitly or as Debian-UK with the assumption that Debian-UK is the UK branch of Debian. .From my overview of this discussion, it is just a petty person dispute between the in people and the out ones, and some critiziscm at the fact that debian-uk was setup slopily and in a way which may make random UK based DD liable (altough i guess any court would take the reasonable approach over the opt-out thingy, and not make those co-opted members liable, but IANAL). I believe there is some animosity due to the opt-out issue but that's not what I'm focused on since it's not terribly interesting. There are some important issues here regarding Debian's non-commercial stance and use of its name in other countries. So, go solv your internal and interpersonal affairs between yourselves, or bring some more real problems here that warrant this long flamewar :) It might help to point out that I'm not in the UK.. Thanks, Stephen signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian UK
* Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 12:30:39AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote: The debian trademark policy says no businesses get to use the mark. Why should this selling association, which ignores good practice, get a swift exception, while Ian Murdock's development association gets referred for negotiations? Because, quite simply, they are not a business, at least in the sense that was meant at the above. I'm not so sure I agree with this interpretation... When we claim to not sell products, and therefore claim to be non-commercial, I'd have to say that I'd expect anything which does sell products or is commercial would be considered a business to us. I mean, take LinuxTag for example, there where guys there at the debian booth selling t-shirts and stuff, don't know the detail, but nobody bashed them for doing business in debian name, and i believe as long as the money is not given out to share-holders, but is for debian (either as plain donation, or expensed for debian related stuff, like stock renewal and the ocassional yearly party), then everything is fine and you are just silly in claiming the contrary. Either Debian's going to be a commercial entity or it's not. I'd brought this issue up before (on d-d I believe) and got shot down by a number of people for proposing that we try to supplement our cash reserves by selling things and perhaps some day be able to pay for our own hosting, etc. And BTW, anyway, does the debian trademark extend to textile and such ? Or is it only restricted to software products ? That's an interesting question and not really very well phrased and so is kind of difficult to answer. Thanks, Stephen signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian UK
* Stephen Frost ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050907 14:02]: * Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 12:30:39AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote: The debian trademark policy says no businesses get to use the mark. Why should this selling association, which ignores good practice, get a swift exception, while Ian Murdock's development association gets referred for negotiations? Because, quite simply, they are not a business, at least in the sense that was meant at the above. I'm not so sure I agree with this interpretation... When we claim to not sell products, and therefore claim to be non-commercial, I'd have to say that I'd expect anything which does sell products or is commercial would be considered a business to us. Well, I don't know how the british rules are, but at least here (Germany) a non-commercial institution can do business, as long as the business helps in reaching the institution's goals. And selling Debian T-Shirts falls into that aspect IMHO. (Business because it doesn't really always fall within the business laws.) I mean, take LinuxTag for example, there where guys there at the debian booth selling t-shirts and stuff, don't know the detail, but nobody bashed them for doing business in debian name, and i believe as long as the money is not given out to share-holders, but is for debian (either as plain donation, or expensed for debian related stuff, like stock renewal and the ocassional yearly party), then everything is fine and you are just silly in claiming the contrary. Either Debian's going to be a commercial entity or it's not. Debian is not a commercial entity just because it _also_ sells T-Shirts and other stuff. Cheers, Andi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 07:52:40AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: What makes it even worse is that on debian.org websites we claim to not sell products yet at the *Debian* booth at whichever UK expos DUS goes to we *are* selling products. It seems pretty likely that the sponsored booth is in Debian's name, either explicitly or as Debian-UK with the assumption that Debian-UK is the UK branch of Debian. I saw products being sold at LinuxTag's debian booth, and saw no major problem with that. .From my overview of this discussion, it is just a petty person dispute between the in people and the out ones, and some critiziscm at the fact that debian-uk was setup slopily and in a way which may make random UK based DD liable (altough i guess any court would take the reasonable approach over the opt-out thingy, and not make those co-opted members liable, but IANAL). I believe there is some animosity due to the opt-out issue but that's not what I'm focused on since it's not terribly interesting. There are some important issues here regarding Debian's non-commercial stance and use of its name in other countries. Come on, be serious, selling a few tshirts and stuff during a couple yearly expos and having the benefit go to debian is hardly what anyone serious minded mentions as commercial when speaking about debian. The problem would appear if there was a large volume being made, if the profit didn't go exclusively to debian, and such. So, go solv your internal and interpersonal affairs between yourselves, or bring some more real problems here that warrant this long flamewar :) It might help to point out that I'm not in the UK.. He, thanks, i didn't know that. Anyway, if you are serious about getting this stuff cleared out, make a policy proposal, but please stop this name calling non-sense. If the proposal is good, it will either be adopted, or we can vote on this, but i guess this would further ridiculie us in the face of the world than this thread already does. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
* Matthew Garrett ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Stephen Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: #2 and #5 work fine together also but shouldn't be done under something claiming close ties to Debian. Right, and there's some amount of contention on this point, which I think is the main issue that we should be considering. I think part of the problem is that commercial has connotations of Red Hat like organisation, which gives an immediate no reaction. For this part it's a misunderstanding of what commercial means. I tried to work past this in the thread on d-d where I brought up the possibility of Debian being a commercial organization and it was made quite clear to me (by Manoj, if memory serves, sorry if I'm wrong) that there was no such misunderstanding about the term. It was understood that commercial != for-profit and that it was being commercial at all which was the problem. It's somewhat worth pointing out that Mark has something of a reputation [...] Not relevant and so not worth commenting on. Honestly, I wish these constant attempts to assign blame for this situation would just stop. I'm not trying to blame anyone. Personally, I think Debian/SPI should be selling things but I respect that the apparent majority disagrees with me on that. Certainly if Debian/SPI isn't going to do it then Debian/SPI in other countries shouldn't either. That's what Debian-UK comes across to me as- the UK branch of Debian. It seems you'd like for it to be percieved that way as well. It's not if it's selling things. Simply using the argument Debian's legal entity doesn't sell things, therefore no closely associated entity should sell things either isn't very convincing - it's more worthwhile to look at /why/ SPI doesn't engage in any commercial activities. The usual arguments seem to be: It's worthwhile to attempt to convince Debian at large to become a commercial entity. This didn't seem terribly likely to happen when I brought it up last but perhaps it's time for another go at it. I do still feel that whichever way Debian decides should be understood, accepted, and followed for Debian branches in other countries. I also feel that a name like 'Debian UK' should be reserved, by trademark law if necessary, for such Debian branches who then have to report directly to the DPL, etc. I also feel that things like booths which are sponsored by others for Debian should follow the decision. To some extent I don't think SPI really enters into this too much. If Debian wanted to go commercial but SPI didn't then Debian could find another organization similar to SPI but was commercial. If it's not legally possible to have a commercial non-profit (I don't believe that's the case...) then that might be a problem. In the end I think that if Debian decided to go commercial that SPI would follow. a) It impairs donations (we've seen no sign at all of this happening in the UK) I've certainly heard concerns that the policy of some universities where we have hosting/mirrors is that such donations must be to a non-commercial entity. It's possible other donations of hardware and hosting from businesses would also have this issue. I don't believe the imperical evidence you've seen outlines very well the implications of Debian officially deciding to be a commercial entity. It seems very likely to me that most places which donate hosting and hardware view Debian as a non-commercial entity (based on what we claim on our website and what the DDs they communicate with quite possibly believe). In order to judge the impact of changing to a commercial organization I believe we'd need to contact these donars and get their reaction to this change. It's possible they wouldn't care but I don't believe we can draw that conclusion from what Debian-UK has seen at expos. b) It impairs competition (the leading Linux CD manufacturers in the UK supply us with the CDs that get sold, and certainly don't seem to be complaining) Certainly it's likely to impair competition. We are benefitted by being able to claim that it's Debian selling the products, and also that all proceeds will go back to Debian. It's certainly possible that CD manufacturers don't care but I don't believe that's an indication that it doesn't impair competition. Now, personally, I don't particularly mind if it impairs competition... I believe that in the end if we're able to sustain Debian, infrastructure at least, from the donations and commercial sales that it'd be a good thing for Debian. I certainly feel we should continue to be a non-profit though and continue to work in the public interest. c) It's Just Wrong (which is a bit difficult to argue against) These are good arguments for why Debian should be commercial. That doesn't mean that Debian has decided to be commercial and while we continue to advertise that we're non-commercial entities which are closely tied to Debian and use the Debian mark should also be
Re: Debian UK
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 08:03:03AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: * Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 12:30:39AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote: The debian trademark policy says no businesses get to use the mark. Why should this selling association, which ignores good practice, get a swift exception, while Ian Murdock's development association gets referred for negotiations? Because, quite simply, they are not a business, at least in the sense that was meant at the above. I'm not so sure I agree with this interpretation... When we claim to not sell products, and therefore claim to be non-commercial, I'd have to say that I'd expect anything which does sell products or is commercial would be considered a business to us. Oh come on, do you have an idea of the volume involved ? And as far as i know, debian is a software project, not a tshirt-and-mug-and-whatnot selling one. I mean, take LinuxTag for example, there where guys there at the debian booth selling t-shirts and stuff, don't know the detail, but nobody bashed them for doing business in debian name, and i believe as long as the money is not given out to share-holders, but is for debian (either as plain donation, or expensed for debian related stuff, like stock renewal and the ocassional yearly party), then everything is fine and you are just silly in claiming the contrary. Either Debian's going to be a commercial entity or it's not. I'd brought this issue up before (on d-d I believe) and got shot down by a number of people for proposing that we try to supplement our cash reserves by selling things and perhaps some day be able to pay for our own hosting, etc. So ? Jumping in it this whole mess instead of doing a proper proposal will hardly bring you a more serious hearing from most here (well, at least not from me). And BTW, anyway, does the debian trademark extend to textile and such ? Or is it only restricted to software products ? That's an interesting question and not really very well phrased and so is kind of difficult to answer. That is bullshit, and you perfectly know it. Anyone with the less knowledge about trademark know that they are not all encompassing, but that you have to declare field of endeavour or whatever it is called. In france if you delclare a trademark you get to fill for 3-4 fields for the same price for example. I guess that the debian trademark covers software and other computer related product, but does it covers drinks, carpentry, toys for children, vestimentary stuff, kitchen equipements and so on ? (well, not quite sure about the categories, but software and tshirt definitvely don't fall in the same category). Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
* Andreas Barth ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: * Stephen Frost ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050907 14:02]: I'm not so sure I agree with this interpretation... When we claim to not sell products, and therefore claim to be non-commercial, I'd have to say that I'd expect anything which does sell products or is commercial would be considered a business to us. Well, I don't know how the british rules are, but at least here (Germany) a non-commercial institution can do business, as long as the business helps in reaching the institution's goals. And selling Debian T-Shirts falls into that aspect IMHO. (Business because it doesn't really always fall within the business laws.) Perhaps there's a language misunderstanding here. Commercial *means* selling things, at least where I'm from. What you're referring to seems to be what I'd understand as a non-profit. These are two distinct things. IANAL but I do believe that in the US a non-profit is similar to what you call a 'non-commercial institution' in that it can sell things provided it helps in reaching the goals and therefore is in the public interest. Either way, however, we do claim to not sell products. I hope there's no misunderstanding on what that means. To me, selling t-shirts would fall under selling products, and therefore would be commercial activity, though not necessairly for-profit. Either Debian's going to be a commercial entity or it's not. Debian is not a commercial entity just because it _also_ sells T-Shirts and other stuff. Selling things is exactly what being a commercial entity means. :( Thanks, Stephen signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian UK
* Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 08:03:03AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: I'm not so sure I agree with this interpretation... When we claim to not sell products, and therefore claim to be non-commercial, I'd have to say that I'd expect anything which does sell products or is commercial would be considered a business to us. Oh come on, do you have an idea of the volume involved ? And as far as i know, debian is a software project, not a tshirt-and-mug-and-whatnot selling one. Being commercial or not isn't dependent upon how much is sold. If you feel that the majority of Debian would be okay with some volume limitation of how much it sells then that might be something to follow-up on but I don't believe organizations which donate to us have such limitations in their policies regarding commercial entities they want to donate to... Either Debian's going to be a commercial entity or it's not. I'd brought this issue up before (on d-d I believe) and got shot down by a number of people for proposing that we try to supplement our cash reserves by selling things and perhaps some day be able to pay for our own hosting, etc. So ? Jumping in it this whole mess instead of doing a proper proposal will hardly bring you a more serious hearing from most here (well, at least not from me). I'm not the one who's already activitely selling products... I'm not really here to advocate my position that Debian should be commercial, my original concern was that Debian should decide one way or the other and then Debian and close entities should follow that decision, which is not being done. I brought up that I feel Debian should be a commercial entity more to point out that I'm not against the idea but about going against what I felt was the majority and the existing policy. And BTW, anyway, does the debian trademark extend to textile and such ? Or is it only restricted to software products ? That's an interesting question and not really very well phrased and so is kind of difficult to answer. That is bullshit, and you perfectly know it. Anyone with the less knowledge about trademark know that they are not all encompassing, but that you have to declare field of endeavour or whatever it is called. In france if you delclare a trademark you get to fill for 3-4 fields for the same price for example. No, trademarks aren't all encompassing. There's also copyright law which governs the logo. There's also the issue that you're not selling a type of t-shirt which you've decided to trademark and call 'Debian'. There's also the issue that it's being sold at the Debian booth, etc. It's not so simple as you're trying to make it out to be, unfortunately. I guess that the debian trademark covers software and other computer related product, but does it covers drinks, carpentry, toys for children, vestimentary stuff, kitchen equipements and so on ? (well, not quite sure about the categories, but software and tshirt definitvely don't fall in the same category). No, they don't, but that's not what's at issue here and claiming it is shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the issue... Thanks, Stephen signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian UK
* Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 07:52:40AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: What makes it even worse is that on debian.org websites we claim to not sell products yet at the *Debian* booth at whichever UK expos DUS goes to we *are* selling products. It seems pretty likely that the sponsored booth is in Debian's name, either explicitly or as Debian-UK with the assumption that Debian-UK is the UK branch of Debian. I saw products being sold at LinuxTag's debian booth, and saw no major problem with that. Great, then perhaps you'd support a move for Debian to become a commercial entity. I suspect you're in the minority but I'd be happy to be wrong. I believe there is some animosity due to the opt-out issue but that's not what I'm focused on since it's not terribly interesting. There are some important issues here regarding Debian's non-commercial stance and use of its name in other countries. Come on, be serious, selling a few tshirts and stuff during a couple yearly expos and having the benefit go to debian is hardly what anyone serious minded mentions as commercial when speaking about debian. I'm being completely serious and I certainly consider selling products to be commercial activity. The problem would appear if there was a large volume being made, if the profit didn't go exclusively to debian, and such. I don't believe being commercial has some kind of volume requirement. It might help to point out that I'm not in the UK.. He, thanks, i didn't know that. Anyway, if you are serious about getting this stuff cleared out, make a policy proposal, but please stop this name calling non-sense. See, the issue is that I understood that there was already a policy of being non-commercial. It would seem our website and at least some other DDs would agree with that understanding. I don't mind a proposal to change that policy but I don't feel that excuses entities in other countries from having to follow the current policy. If the proposal is good, it will either be adopted, or we can vote on this, but i guess this would further ridiculie us in the face of the world than this thread already does. I think we'd have to vote on it, personally.. Perhaps not though. I do think we should do some research into what our current donars would think of such a change in policy though. Either way I think it's certainly a fair question to ask of ourselves and don't feel asking it would somehow be of detriment to Debian. Thanks, Stephen signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian UK
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 08:47:24AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: * Andreas Barth ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: * Stephen Frost ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050907 14:02]: I'm not so sure I agree with this interpretation... When we claim to not sell products, and therefore claim to be non-commercial, I'd have to say that I'd expect anything which does sell products or is commercial would be considered a business to us. Well, I don't know how the british rules are, but at least here (Germany) a non-commercial institution can do business, as long as the business helps in reaching the institution's goals. And selling Debian T-Shirts falls into that aspect IMHO. (Business because it doesn't really always fall within the business laws.) Perhaps there's a language misunderstanding here. Commercial *means* selling things, at least where I'm from. What you're referring to seems to be what I'd understand as a non-profit. These are two distinct things. IANAL but I do believe that in the US a non-profit is similar to what you call a 'non-commercial institution' in that it can sell things provided it helps in reaching the goals and therefore is in the public interest. Nope, restricting your world view in warped US-interpretation. Let's say your paroquial association or housewife get-together association, start to sell house-made cakes in order to finance the repainting or fixing of the roof of their church or school or whatever. Or school children raising money for an excursion or whatever. This, independent of the law involved, is by any common sense applied to it no business or commerce, and is quite similar to what is going on at shows and events, when there are t-shirts being sold at the debian booth. That the money is used to pay the fee for the booth, have a nice big after-event party, or whatnot, or sponsors travel of debian developpers to events, that is all fine, and nothing to be ashamed about, and in no case is this a business or commercial venture. Either way, however, we do claim to not sell products. I hope there's no misunderstanding on what that means. To me, selling t-shirts would fall under selling products, and therefore would be commercial activity, though not necessairly for-profit. Nope, if you are really from the US, then your view on this is limited by the way you think there, and if not, no idea if you ever participated in associative life. Either Debian's going to be a commercial entity or it's not. Debian is not a commercial entity just because it _also_ sells T-Shirts and other stuff. Selling things is exactly what being a commercial entity means. :( Bullshit. Please educate yourself. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 10:01:12AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: * Henning Makholm ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Well, there's a BIG similarity: * both took the debian name for business use without consent; You are pretty much the only one who asserts that Debian UK has anything at all to do with business. I'd have to disagree with this. It's certainly commercial in what it does and that's been frowned upon by DDs for Debian/SPI in the US. AIUI, that's been frowned upon in the US because actually selling things makes you liable for collecting/paying sales tax which is a huge nuisance. Giving stuff away and asking for a donation, meanwhile, doesn't. Different countries handle that differently. For reference, Australia allows certain companies to call themselves charities for tax purposes; but they're restricted to very specific purposes, none of which cover developing a free operating system to benefit humanity as a whole. Also, who exactly is 'the rest of us'? It certainly doesn't include me and I'd claim that it doesn't include anyone but you. It certainly includes me. Businesses are run for the profit of their founders, shareholders or members. Debian-UK's run to improve Debian, and any excess funds are kept around and spent for the organisations stated aims; at least as far as I can see from the other side of the world. If there are people who specifically agree with you then let them speak for themselves. How about you do the same, instead of claiming that none of us do? Cheers, aj signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian UK
On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 02:34:25PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: I don't know how real those concerns are, but I know I've heard them. Man, I love open source FUD. Cheers, aj signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian UK
* Anthony Towns (aj@azure.humbug.org.au) [050907 15:02]: AIUI, that's been frowned upon in the US because actually selling things makes you liable for collecting/paying sales tax which is a huge nuisance. Giving stuff away and asking for a donation, meanwhile, doesn't. Different countries handle that differently. For example in Germany, sales taxes don't need to be payed if you make less than ~16000 Euro revenues per year with selling stuff (it's a bit more complex, but - well, that's basically why this is not an issue). For reference, Australia allows certain companies to call themselves charities for tax purposes; but they're restricted to very specific purposes, none of which cover developing a free operating system to benefit humanity as a whole. Within German law, Debian is even a chartiy, which goes nice for tax purposes (however, being a charity doesn't help you with the sales tax stuff at all here, but that doesn't matter because we're small enough in financial terms). :) Cheers, Andi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
Stephen Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I believe there is some animosity due to the opt-out issue but that's not what I'm focused on since it's not terribly interesting. [...] No, not interesting, until something you disagree with is done in your name without consent. When it's a technical question, everyone flames quickly for freedom or the demonstrably best, but it feels the other way on ethical questions now. The particular cases may not worry many people yet, but the character assassination and disrespect is disturbing me. It's claimed that I'm in a minority of UK DDs in not wanting any assocation with DUS. That's a non-argument. It's not good to ignore basic rights just because you think only a minority is affected. Do we really need debian to agree to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights? At the moment, would it do so? I've been trying to resolve these problems with the DUS leaders since the constitution was announced in March, pointing likely defects in the pub draft (in public and private) and suggesting they use a good example instead, but I've never been universally popular with UK DDs: I'm not a computer scientist, I don't drink enough, I'm not diplomatic enough and I call bugs bugs. With technical things, that doesn't matter, as in the end, you can demonstrate or test it. Law doesn't do that so easily. Ultimately, I've researched this and am sure enough, but I'm going to do the minimum possible to fix it to my satisfaction now, which includes explaining this here! Good luck with discovering debian's attitude to commerce, whatever the outcome. Best wishes, -- MJ Ray (slef), K. Lynn, England, email see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
* Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 08:47:24AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: Perhaps there's a language misunderstanding here. Commercial *means* selling things, at least where I'm from. What you're referring to seems to be what I'd understand as a non-profit. These are two distinct things. IANAL but I do believe that in the US a non-profit is similar to what you call a 'non-commercial institution' in that it can sell things provided it helps in reaching the goals and therefore is in the public interest. Nope, restricting your world view in warped US-interpretation. Funny, I thought it was a warped English-interpretation of the English language. dict seems to agree with my interpretation. :/ Let's say your paroquial association or housewife get-together association, start to sell house-made cakes in order to finance the repainting or fixing of the roof of their church or school or whatever. Or school children raising money for an excursion or whatever. This, independent of the law involved, is by any common sense applied to it no business or commerce, and is quite similar to what is going on at shows and events, when there are t-shirts being sold at the debian booth. Honestly, you're the first one to bring up that there's some limitation on volume regarding being commercial or non-commercial. This still doesn't deal with the issue that we claim to not sell products on our webpage. Do you happen to know what the volume is before you become a commercial entity? I have some serious difficulty directly equating non-commercial and non-profit. Perhaps that's just the US laws I'm vauguely familiar with influencing me. Either way though I'd like to know at what point would you consider Debian a commercial entity? That the money is used to pay the fee for the booth, have a nice big after-event party, or whatnot, or sponsors travel of debian developpers to events, that is all fine, and nothing to be ashamed about, and in no case is this a business or commercial venture. So, who's going to update the webpage to reflect this and exactly what is it going to say? Either way, however, we do claim to not sell products. I hope there's no misunderstanding on what that means. To me, selling t-shirts would fall under selling products, and therefore would be commercial activity, though not necessairly for-profit. Nope, if you are really from the US, then your view on this is limited by the way you think there, and if not, no idea if you ever participated in associative life. Uhh... http://www.debian.org/CD/vendors/info Debian does not sell any products. I don't *think* that my being in the US is somehow making me read that differently than the rest of the world, but hey, if you see something different on that page, please let me know! Either Debian's going to be a commercial entity or it's not. Debian is not a commercial entity just because it _also_ sells T-Shirts and other stuff. Selling things is exactly what being a commercial entity means. :( Bullshit. Please educate yourself. Uh-huh. Friendly, So kind. :) Thanks, Stephen signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian UK
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 08:58:59AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: * Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 07:52:40AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: What makes it even worse is that on debian.org websites we claim to not sell products yet at the *Debian* booth at whichever UK expos DUS goes to we *are* selling products. It seems pretty likely that the sponsored booth is in Debian's name, either explicitly or as Debian-UK with the assumption that Debian-UK is the UK branch of Debian. I saw products being sold at LinuxTag's debian booth, and saw no major problem with that. Great, then perhaps you'd support a move for Debian to become a commercial entity. I suspect you're in the minority but I'd be happy to be wrong. I guess that simply means that you have no clue what a comercial entity is :) See my other mail. If the proposal is good, it will either be adopted, or we can vote on this, but i guess this would further ridiculie us in the face of the world than this thread already does. I think we'd have to vote on it, personally.. Perhaps not though. I do think we should do some research into what our current donars would think of such a change in policy though. Either way I think it's certainly a fair question to ask of ourselves and don't feel asking it would somehow be of detriment to Debian. Sure, but not over an internal disput of those UK guys :) Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
* MJ Ray ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Stephen Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I believe there is some animosity due to the opt-out issue but that's not what I'm focused on since it's not terribly interesting. [...] No, not interesting, until something you disagree with is done in your name without consent. When it's a technical question, everyone flames quickly for freedom or the demonstrably best, but it feels the other way on ethical questions now. The particular cases may not worry many people yet, but the character assassination and disrespect is disturbing me. I already pointed out that I thought it was a bad idea and that it needs to be resolved in another thread... Sorry, I'm not terribly interested in fighting for it though, you seemed to be doing a fine job of that yourself and indeed at least one of the Debian-UK people seemed to indicate that they were going to change things to make it opt-in instead so perhaps you've already won that battle... Good luck with discovering debian's attitude to commerce, whatever the outcome. Thanks, Stephen signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian UK
* Anthony Towns (aj@azure.humbug.org.au) wrote: On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 02:34:25PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: I don't know how real those concerns are, but I know I've heard them. Man, I love open source FUD. Yes, I rock. :) Sorry, I didn't look up the other thread I started, been kinda busy replying to people. :) Thanks, Stephen signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian UK
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 09:11:25AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: * Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Nope, if you are really from the US, then your view on this is limited by the way you think there, and if not, no idea if you ever participated in associative life. Uhh... http://www.debian.org/CD/vendors/info Debian does not sell any products. I don't *think* that my being in the US is somehow making me read that differently than the rest of the world, but hey, if you see something different on that page, please let me know! Notice that the link is on the CD selling page, right ? Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 08:53:54AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: And BTW, anyway, does the debian trademark extend to textile and such ? Or is it only restricted to software products ? That's an interesting question and not really very well phrased and so is kind of difficult to answer. That is bullshit, and you perfectly know it. Anyone with the less knowledge about trademark know that they are not all encompassing, but that you have to declare field of endeavour or whatever it is called. In france if you delclare a trademark you get to fill for 3-4 fields for the same price for example. No, trademarks aren't all encompassing. There's also copyright law which governs the logo. There's also the issue that you're not selling a type of t-shirt which you've decided to trademark and call 'Debian'. There's also the issue that it's being sold at the Debian booth, etc. It's not so simple as you're trying to make it out to be, unfortunately. My question was plain simple, does the debian trademark extend to textiles and other t-shirt or is it only covering software ? This has a simple answer, and does not include the stuff you are speaking about, which are a separate matter. I guess that the debian trademark covers software and other computer related product, but does it covers drinks, carpentry, toys for children, vestimentary stuff, kitchen equipements and so on ? (well, not quite sure about the categories, but software and tshirt definitvely don't fall in the same category). No, they don't, but that's not what's at issue here and claiming it is shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the issue... I have seen the word Trademark mentioned in a subject of a subthread here, so ... Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
Stephen Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For this part it's a misunderstanding of what commercial means. I tried to work past this in the thread on d-d where I brought up the possibility of Debian being a commercial organization and it was made quite clear to me (by Manoj, if memory serves, sorry if I'm wrong) that there was no such misunderstanding about the term. It was understood that commercial !=3D for-profit and that it was being commercial at all which was the problem. Well, no, that doesn't obviously follow. It's clear from this discussion that people do disagree about what the word commercial means, and that (for some) commercial is worse than sells things. It's somewhat worth pointing out that Mark has something of a reputation [...] Not relevant and so not worth commenting on. Honestly, I wish these constant attempts to assign blame for this situation would just stop. =20 I'm not trying to blame anyone. When it comes to I don't follow debian-uk and it certainly doesn't sound like it's actually been resolved in an acceptable way regardless, it's entirely relevant. There are some people for whom things will not be resolved in acceptable ways. It's worthwhile to attempt to convince Debian at large to become a commercial entity. This didn't seem terribly likely to happen when I brought it up last but perhaps it's time for another go at it. When it comes to the technical side of things, policy follows practice. It's long been the case that Debian sells CDs at European events. To the best of my knowledge, until now there has never been any real complaints over this sort of behaviour. It's hardly as if we've been hiding this - see http://www.debian.org/events/2003/1008-linuxexpo-report for instance. I'd argue that this isn't something that Debian as a whole has an objection to, and that (as a result) the website should be changed. I don't think it's hard to know why the current situation has arisen... Some folks believe, as I do, that it'd be alright for Debian to be a commercial entity, and they then decided to just do it. It's unfortunate they didn't first get Debian/SPI to agree with them. If they had then we wouldn't be having this discussion. The current situation of Why Debian doesn't sell CDs. I've no idea why that's the way it is. What historical process led to this situation? -- Matthew Garrett | [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 09:11:25AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: * Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Let's say your paroquial association or housewife get-together association, start to sell house-made cakes in order to finance the repainting or fixing of the roof of their church or school or whatever. Or school children raising money for an excursion or whatever. You didn't reply to this above example. Plain simple, is this commercial and business for you, or is it not ? Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, I'm not sure that's much of a counterargument. Just because DUS has chosen as partners companies that are a) leaders in their field and b) happy with the arrangement doesn't mean that its CD sales have zero impact on *others* that might be trying to sell CDs, does it? Not that I have a problem with Steve, Phil, and the others either buying or selling CDs, but we should consider whether it's appropriate to be selling them under the name Debian UK Society. Maybe it doesn't a damn bit of difference, though -- whether it's DUS, or Phil and Steve, they're obviously going to be sold at the Debian booth, so the name endorsement is already there, right? From what I recall, the only other people that typically sell CDs at UK shows are the people that provide us with CDs. It's /possible/ that in the absence of Debian selling CDs, other companies would have sprung up to do so - but that's fairly extreme handwaving. No evidence has ever been presented that this situation discourages anyone. -- Matthew Garrett | [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
* Anthony Towns (aj@azure.humbug.org.au) wrote: AIUI, that's been frowned upon in the US because actually selling things makes you liable for collecting/paying sales tax which is a huge nuisance. Giving stuff away and asking for a donation, meanwhile, doesn't. Different countries handle that differently. For reference, Australia allows certain companies to call themselves charities for tax purposes; but they're restricted to very specific purposes, none of which cover developing a free operating system to benefit humanity as a whole. Do you happen to be familiar with how the UK handles it? I'm not really sure it matters though, I think Debian should be consistant one way or the other. If there are people who specifically agree with you then let them speak for themselves. How about you do the same, instead of claiming that none of us do? Fair enough. Thanks, Stephen signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian UK
* Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 09:11:25AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: * Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Nope, if you are really from the US, then your view on this is limited by the way you think there, and if not, no idea if you ever participated in associative life. Uhh... http://www.debian.org/CD/vendors/info Debian does not sell any products. I don't *think* that my being in the US is somehow making me read that differently than the rest of the world, but hey, if you see something different on that page, please let me know! Notice that the link is on the CD selling page, right ? Even so, that was the general policy as I understood it... Should we be saying that we don't sell CDs (do the DUS folks sell CDs? I dunno) only there? Should we be pointing out that we do sell t-shirts somewhere? Thanks, Stephen signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian UK
* Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 09:11:25AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: * Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Let's say your paroquial association or housewife get-together association, start to sell house-made cakes in order to finance the repainting or fixing of the roof of their church or school or whatever. Or school children raising money for an excursion or whatever. You didn't reply to this above example. Plain simple, is this commercial and business for you, or is it not ? I'd say it's commercial but non-profit and small enough to not have to deal with taxes. I'm not sure that a large international organization such as Debian could really just say well, so long as you don't have to pay taxes in your jurisdiction it's ok... If that's the policy then alright then. Thanks, Stephen signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian UK
* Matthew Garrett ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Stephen Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For this part it's a misunderstanding of what commercial means. I tried to work past this in the thread on d-d where I brought up the possibility of Debian being a commercial organization and it was made quite clear to me (by Manoj, if memory serves, sorry if I'm wrong) that there was no such misunderstanding about the term. It was understood that commercial !=3D for-profit and that it was being commercial at all which was the problem. Well, no, that doesn't obviously follow. It's clear from this discussion that people do disagree about what the word commercial means, and that (for some) commercial is worse than sells things. Well, it seemed clear to me that some, at least, had a problem with sells things alone and so the issue wasn't a misunderstanding with what commercial meant anyway. It's somewhat worth pointing out that Mark has something of a reputation [...] Not relevant and so not worth commenting on. Honestly, I wish these constant attempts to assign blame for this situation would just stop. =20 I'm not trying to blame anyone. When it comes to I don't follow debian-uk and it certainly doesn't sound like it's actually been resolved in an acceptable way regardless, it's entirely relevant. There are some people for whom things will not be resolved in acceptable ways. Alright, it has yet to be resolved in an acceptable way for me. :) It's worthwhile to attempt to convince Debian at large to become a commercial entity. This didn't seem terribly likely to happen when I brought it up last but perhaps it's time for another go at it. When it comes to the technical side of things, policy follows practice. Alright. In general I believe the practice *has* been that we don't sell things. I agree that policy follows practice on the technical side but it's not always clear that the 'practice' is something we *don't* do. It's long been the case that Debian sells CDs at European events. To the best of my knowledge, until now there has never been any real complaints over this sort of behaviour. It's hardly as if we've been hiding this - see http://www.debian.org/events/2003/1008-linuxexpo-report for instance. I'd argue that this isn't something that Debian as a whole has an objection to, and that (as a result) the website should be changed. Alright, then let's change the website and let's put up a better explanation of our policies regarding selling things. I'd rather that policy not be location-specific but it sounds like it'd have to be for what's currently happening to be accurately reflected. I don't think it's hard to know why the current situation has arisen... Some folks believe, as I do, that it'd be alright for Debian to be a commercial entity, and they then decided to just do it. It's unfortunate they didn't first get Debian/SPI to agree with them. If they had then we wouldn't be having this discussion. The current situation of Why Debian doesn't sell CDs. I've no idea why that's the way it is. What historical process led to this situation? It sounds like, at least in the US, there's an issue with sales tax, and quite possibly that's what other DDs believed in terms of what Debian's policy is. Thanks, Stephen signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian UK
Stephen Frost wrote: * Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 09:11:25AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: * Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: [...] Uhh... http://www.debian.org/CD/vendors/info Debian does not sell any products. I don't *think* that my being in the US is somehow making me read that differently than the rest of the world, but hey, if you see something different on that page, please let me know! Notice that the link is on the CD selling page, right ? Even so, that was the general policy as I understood it... Should we be saying that we don't sell CDs (do the DUS folks sell CDs? I dunno) only there? Should we be pointing out that we do sell t-shirts somewhere? I have a feeling that the main reason Debian doesn't sell anything is that Debian doesn't own anything, because Debian doesn't exist as a legal entity (that's what SPI's for). That being the case, Debian also cannot attend Expos. It's always a case of individuals and/or organisations doing so on Debian's behalf. Cheers, Phil. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Debian UK
* Philip Hands ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Stephen Frost wrote: Even so, that was the general policy as I understood it... Should we be saying that we don't sell CDs (do the DUS folks sell CDs? I dunno) only there? Should we be pointing out that we do sell t-shirts somewhere? I have a feeling that the main reason Debian doesn't sell anything is that Debian doesn't own anything, because Debian doesn't exist as a legal entity (that's what SPI's for). That being the case, Debian also cannot attend Expos. It's always a case of individuals and/or organisations doing so on Debian's behalf. If they're doing it on Debian's behalf then they should be following Debian's policies, which at least on the website has thusfar been that Debian doesn't sell products (or perhaps just doesn't sell CDs). That's also been the general understanding that I've had of Debian's polciies. Not to mention that it sounds like you'd like an SPI-like organization in the UK for Debian which would then be the organization attending the expos anyway... Thanks, Stephen signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian UK
Matthew Garrett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] There are some people for whom things will not be resolved in acceptable ways. When I'm not part of DUS and don't have to allow DUS to hold my personal details, it's resolved for me. I'm surprised if that's unacceptable to anyone. There's a shed-load of other stuff that would be nice to see, but not enough for me to act on. It's worthwhile to attempt to convince Debian at large to become a commercial entity. This didn't seem terribly likely to happen when I brought it up last but perhaps it's time for another go at it. When it comes to the technical side of things, policy follows practice. So why flout previous policy? Presumably there's some past practice which caused it, even if it's just writing. If you really believe no-one objects, make the change first. Debian policy is not just post-event rationalisation of DD actions. -- MJ Ray (slef) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
Stephen Frost wrote: If they're doing it on Debian's behalf then they should be following Debian's policies, which at least on the website has thusfar been that Debian doesn't sell products (or perhaps just doesn't sell CDs). That's also been the general understanding that I've had of Debian's polciies. I'd draw a distinction between Debian and it's representatives at Expos and the like. I'm certainly not trying to suggest that Debian should sell merchandise via www.debian.org (or even via www.uk.debian.org, say) As far as I know it's generally been the case that Debian merchandise has been available for purchase from Debian Expo stands in most European countries. In fact, if I was going to a show elsewhere, I'd be disappointed if I didn't get the chance to buy the local Debian designs. All the shows I have been to have offered me that chance AFAIK (in fact I was quite surprised to discover that this is not the case in the US, but I suppose local sales tax is a killer) Not to mention that it sounds like you'd like an SPI-like organization in the UK for Debian which would then be the organization attending the expos anyway... Is it SPI or a random assortment of Debian folks that attend expos in the US? Cheers, Phil. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Debian UK
* Stephen Frost ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050907 16:15]: In general I believe the practice *has* been that we don't sell things. Actually, I have never seen any Debian booth where we didn't sell things. With exception of fairs where the fair didn't allow it. It's long been the case that Debian sells CDs at European events. To the best of my knowledge, until now there has never been any real complaints over this sort of behaviour. It's hardly as if we've been hiding this - see http://www.debian.org/events/2003/1008-linuxexpo-report for instance. I'd argue that this isn't something that Debian as a whole has an objection to, and that (as a result) the website should be changed. Alright, then let's change the website and let's put up a better explanation of our policies regarding selling things. I'd rather that policy not be location-specific but it sounds like it'd have to be for what's currently happening to be accurately reflected. To something like Debian doesn't sell CDs via the Internet. However, at some events Debian sells CDs (and other stuff), depending if the local applicable laws make that possible without too much ado. ? Cheers, Andi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Should debian formalize t-shirt sales at events (Was Re: Debian-UK).
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 09:33:55AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: * Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 09:11:25AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: * Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Let's say your paroquial association or housewife get-together association, start to sell house-made cakes in order to finance the repainting or fixing of the roof of their church or school or whatever. Or school children raising money for an excursion or whatever. You didn't reply to this above example. Plain simple, is this commercial and business for you, or is it not ? I'd say it's commercial but non-profit and small enough to not have to deal with taxes. I'm not sure that a large international organization such as Debian could really just say well, so long as you don't have to pay taxes in your jurisdiction it's ok... If that's the policy then alright then. Well, at least in germany and france, we have associations which are non-profit, and have the right to do such things, without being businesses or commercial stuff. And naturally, you have the guys who do this informally too, which is what used to happen in the UK previously. But i guess if you compare what happens in the debian-present show events, and the commercial subdistributions, and the above example, and apply common sense, you will fall easily enough on the distinction we are making. The real question is not if there should be debian t-shirts sold on debian booth on events, or not, but : 1) do we want a formal commercial entity in charge of merchandizing the debian frenchize with t-shirts, mugs, whatever. 2) What happens to the money of the above if there is a gain made (and who pays if there is a loss). I guess the reply to debian becoming a commercial entity and doing 1) is clear, at least in the current context, and well, the way 2) currently works is that gains are put in a fund serving for next time stock buying, thus ensuring nobody needs to put money from their own pocket, or donated to debian for use as the DPL decides (or whoever delegate is in charge of that). Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
Merle Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Matthew Garrett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When it comes to the technical side of things, policy follows practice. So why flout previous policy? Presumably there's some past practice which caused it, even if it's just writing. If you really believe no-one objects, make the change first. Debian policy is not just post-event rationalisation of DD actions. Manoj I have seen debian booths selling stuff at every conference since '97 Because policy hasn't matched practice for a very long time. When that's the case, it strongly implies that policy is wrong. -- Matthew Garrett | [EMAIL PROTECTED] My preferred name is you -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
On Wed, 7 Sep 2005, Philip Hands wrote: Is it SPI or a random assortment of Debian folks that attend expos in the US? Random Debian people. Not even DDs in some cases. -- Jaldhar H. Vyas [EMAIL PROTECTED] La Salle Debain - http://www.braincells.com/debian/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
Andreas Barth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, I don't know how the british rules are, but at least here (Germany) a non-commercial institution can do business, as long as the business helps in reaching the institution's goals. [...] What is translating as non-commercial institution here? I'd regard a German e.V. or French association a buts non lucratifs as capable of being commercial, like a UK charity can be commercial. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
MJ Ray wrote: Matthew Garrett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] There are some people for whom things will not be resolved in acceptable ways. When I'm not part of DUS and don't have to allow DUS to hold my personal details, it's resolved for me. I'm surprised if that's unacceptable to anyone. There's a shed-load of other stuff that would be nice to see, but not enough for me to act on. The Debian UK Society don't have your details anywhere -- the rules were written in order to ensure that membership was a matter of definition, rather than a question of being on a list somewhere. Ironically, the only reason it might be necessary to record your details would be to record the fact that you've opted out, but I'm reasonably sure that the secretary membership will manage to recall that fact without artificial aids. Once we switch to opt in, I suppose we'll keep a list of GPG keys belonging to members, which will still not require personal details to be kept. I'm rather surprised you've not managed to work that out on your own, especially given the fact that numerous people have reacted with confusion to your assertion that we're holding your personal details. In conclusion, feel free to relax, we never did have your personal details, and you're no longer a member (having stated in public on at least three occasions that you didn't wish to be one). Cheers, Phil. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Debian UK
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 09:11:25AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: * Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Let's say your paroquial association or housewife get-together association, start to sell house-made cakes in order to finance the repainting or fixing of the roof of their church or school or whatever. Or school children raising money for an excursion or whatever. You didn't reply to this above example. Plain simple, is this commercial and business for you, or is it not ? If you sell stuff in the UK, then tax law applies to you *regardless* of volume. There are *exemptions* in the tax law, but we're doing a good thing isn't one of them. cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
* MJ Ray ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050907 16:32]: Andreas Barth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, I don't know how the british rules are, but at least here (Germany) a non-commercial institution can do business, as long as the business helps in reaching the institution's goals. [...] What is translating as non-commercial institution here? I'd regard a German e.V. or French association a buts non lucratifs as capable of being commercial, like a UK charity can be commercial. usually a non-commercial instituation is a tax-chariatable e.V., which means the amount of commercial things they can do is quite limited. Cheers, Andi - founding-member of 4 such organisations - -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 07:15:19PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote: Philip Hands [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The way we price this stuff has always been based on selling it as cheaply as possible, while making the numbers round for convenient change at Expos, and aiming to do just better than break-even [...] How can anyone define a not-for-profit business if that's not one? I can't, because in my vocabulary not-for-profit business is an oxymoron? In the UK, we can construct companies in a number of ways. A company Limited by Shares is owned by its shareholders, and expected to attempt to return a profit to them. A company Limited by Guarantee isn't and is not expected to produce a profit. They are less common, though. We can also form a Co-operative, owned by its members and not necessarily expected to make a profit. Businesses trade as any of these happily. cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
Matthew Garrett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Manoj I have seen debian booths selling stuff at every conference since '97 Because policy hasn't matched practice for a very long time. When that's the case, it strongly implies that policy is wrong. That doesn't show that policy hasn't matched practice. Stuff can be sold from debian booths without the seller being debian (or calling their business debian). Indeed, that was the practice in the UK until DUS, wasn't it? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
Philip Hands [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd draw a distinction between Debian and it's representatives at Expos and the like. [...] By adding the characters -UK or something more distinctive? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
Modesto Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Matthew Garrett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Manoj I have seen debian booths selling stuff at every conference since '97 Because policy hasn't matched practice for a very long time. When that's the case, it strongly implies that policy is wrong. That doesn't show that policy hasn't matched practice. Stuff can be sold from debian booths without the seller being debian (or calling their business debian). Indeed, that was the practice in the UK until DUS, wasn't it? What's the practical difference between these things? When people give money to a bunch of people standing at a stall with a big Debian sign on it, they assume that they're buying something off Debian. -- Matthew Garrett | [EMAIL PROTECTED] My preferred name is you -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Fri, Sep 02, 2005 at 06:38:38PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote: So the society is certainly a /corporation/, but if it's a business it's a piss-poor one. A corporation is a legal person which can own stuff itself and so on. DUS is an unincorporated association and not a corporation. Ah, so it's an unincorporated society at that. Yes, I can certainly understand the concerns about liability, then. (Likewise, SPI is a corporation, but not a business; and from what I understand of such things, SPI could also not be considered a charity under UK law.) Why not, just out of interest? It seems to act for the benefit of the community and I didn't notice any obvious exclusion. Well, looking through http://www.charity-commision.gov.uk/, I can't actually find anything that spells out how the UK decides whether a stated object is charitable, but I also definitely don't see anything in their example objects that would cover SPI's charter. Education is one of SPI's stated objectives, yes, but advocacy is also, and it's my impression that advocacy is off-limits for UK charities. If the activities are political, it can't be a charity: http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/publications/cc21.asp#5 no organisation can be charitable if: * it is created for the specific purpose of carrying out political or propagandist activities; if the beneficiaries are related or connected to the person who is setting up the charity, or where they are defined by common employment or by membership of a non-charitable body, for example, members of a professional institute. then it cannot be a charity. So a charity for the benefit of Debian members would not work unless Debian was a charity, which it can't be for the aforementioned political reason. cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
Rich Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In the UK, we can construct companies in a number of ways. [...list...] Additionally, you can be a sole trader, a partnership (usually with a private agreement between the members), or some more esoteric ones like a royal charter corporation. Co-operative or charity statuses are more about actions than structure and they exist as any of these and more besides. -- MJR/slef past New Entrepreneur Scholar -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
Henning Makholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Scripsit Rich Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] Actually, depending on what parts of UK law the organisation ended up falling under (and without a clear constitution c this will probably *not* be what you expect it to be) the membership might be jointly and severally liable for the actions of the organisation. Do you mean that under UK law I could unilaterally set up an organization with bylaws that declare that the membership consists of you, and then go on to create debt that you will be legally liable for? Stranger things happen in business on a regular basis. Recently, a UK football club was bought from the shareholders with money borrowed from banks. Now the club is liable for the bank debt. Specifically, though, we have a pool of people already members of an organisation with a constitution. Some of them within a consistent well-defined subset have set up an organisation that appears to include all members of that subset. If that organisation operates for a period of time, then a court would need convincing that the members were not jointly and severally liable for the liabilities of that organisation. This kind of thing fouls up small groups trying to do good on a regular basis. I know that UK law is crazy in some respects, but I cannot believe it is *that* crazy. Heh. Some bits of it work well. The rest is more or less interesting. But at least they've made a sterling effort to make it accessible and understandable. cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
Stephen Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: * Anthony Towns (aj@azure.humbug.org.au) wrote: AIUI, that's been frowned upon in the US because actually selling things makes you liable for collecting/paying sales tax which is a huge nuisance. Giving stuff away and asking for a donation, meanwhile, doesn't. Different countries handle that differently. For reference, Australia allows certain companies to call themselves charities for tax purposes; but they're restricted to very specific purposes, none of which cover developing a free operating system to benefit humanity as a whole. Do you happen to be familiar with how the UK handles it? I'm not really sure it matters though, I think Debian should be consistant one way or the other. In the UK, charities are *heavily regulated*. It's easier to set up a Limited Company than a charity, and for good reason. cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
Stephen Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Honestly, you're the first one to bring up that there's some limitation on volume regarding being commercial or non-commercial. This still doesn't deal with the issue that we claim to not sell products on our webpage. Do you happen to know what the volume is before you become a commercial entity? £6 turnover = you *must* be VAT registered. You might get sued = you *want* a form of association providing protection for officers and members e.g. Limited Company Don't make a profit = nothing at all. Don't want to make a profit = nothing at all You pay money to people in recompense for their efforts or to cover their expenses = someone in the org should understand UK PAYE, Tax and Expenses law. This stuff isn't hard. It's just *stupid* to go around saying oh, we claim we're not commercial because we're not trying to make a profit, just raise some money. It would be like, oh, trying to do contract work without a legal entity to bill through and then wondering why the taxman wanted a lot of money from you. cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 10:15:17AM +0100, Brett Parker wrote: Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 01:50:30AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote: Henning Makholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Scripsit MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] [...] As previously argued, DUS is an enterprise generating income from commercial sale of goods - a business. More assertions. Assertions? That DUS is an enterprise? What exactly is this DUS thingy you are all speaking about ? Is it the same as Debian-UK under another name, or something else ? DUS - Debian UK Society. I'm sure this was obvious from a previous post. Got confunded by both DUS and Debian-Uk appaearing in the same mails, apparently as two separate entities. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
Philip Hands [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On reflection, I think we should ensure that the wording makes it clear that one has to express an interest in membership in order to be considered a member. I'll start a thread to that effect back on the debian-uk list. As a complete bystander, I'd just suggest that you consider using a standard association constitution, so should you get a punitive audit, at least you'll have a structure in place. http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=tct=rescd=3url=http%3A//www.communitylaw.co.uk/files/Structures/constitution.PDFei=5fseQ_7_OM2GwQGgopGWCw cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
Rich Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In the UK, charities are *heavily regulated*. It's easier to set up a Limited Company than a charity, and for good reason. This is a known bug and attempts are being made to fix it somewhat with the light touch approach to small charities: http://www.charitycommission.gov.uk/supportingcharities/ogs/g200a001.asp -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
Rich Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] So a charity for the benefit of Debian members would not work unless Debian was a charity, which it can't be for the aforementioned political reason. I thought the political exeception was most about seeking to directly influence legislation and what-not. Debian's specific purpose is to create a free operating system - is that political? I don't know. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
Hi, * Philip Hands ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050907 12:09]: On reflection, I think we should ensure that the wording makes it clear that one has to express an interest in membership in order to be considered a member. I'll start a thread to that effect back on the debian-uk list. I know a local organisation here where all people that are default members can become member with expressing that interest or taking part in the organisation (like voting), and the quorums are made so that it doesn't matter how many members there are - i.e. you can just start a vote at the right place, and everyone who votes is member. (And same for leaving the organization - their membership expires by itself.) Of course, there are much more ways to do it right, and it's not my task to decide which to take :) Cheers, Andi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
Philip Hands [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] I'm rather surprised you've not managed to work that out on your own, especially given the fact that numerous people have reacted with confusion to your assertion that we're holding your personal details. I suspected it was that way around, but as you noted earlier in your message, there's still no action for me to avoid having inaccurate personal details processed by the society. In conclusion, feel free to relax, we never did have your personal details, and you're no longer a member (having stated in public [...] ^ Nearly. I want no association with DUS, because I never joined your association. DUS should accept non-consenting DDs aren't and never were really part of the association. -- MJR/slef -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
MJ Ray wrote: Philip Hands [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] I'm rather surprised you've not managed to work that out on your own, especially given the fact that numerous people have reacted with confusion to your assertion that we're holding your personal details. I suspected it was that way around, but as you noted earlier in your message, there's still no action for me to avoid having inaccurate personal details processed by the society. Nope, you've lost me again -- what does the rest of that sentence mean? Is the data contained in the debian-keyring that relates to you inaccurate? In conclusion, feel free to relax, we never did have your personal details, and you're no longer a member (having stated in public [...] ^ Nearly. I want no association with DUS, because I never joined your association. DUS should accept non-consenting DDs aren't and never were really part of the association. Works for me :-) Cheers, Phil. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Debian UK
MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Rich Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] So a charity for the benefit of Debian members would not work unless Debian was a charity, which it can't be for the aforementioned political reason. I thought the political exeception was most about seeking to directly influence legislation and what-not. Debian's specific purpose is to create a free operating system - is that political? I don't know. I'm sure someone with an axe to grind against, say, Free Software as a whole would like the chance to use this to drag a bunch of developers into court. Anyway, with the word free in that being free as in freedom, I suspect it is most explicitly political :- cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
Philip Hands [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] Is the data contained in the debian-keyring that relates to you inaccurate? Not as far as I can tell. It's different to db.d.o and easier to edit. It still has no assurance of following our country's data protection principles, so careful how you use it. It's better than db.d.o, though, which is what DUS uses now. Thanks, -- MJR/slef -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
Stephen Frost wrote: http://www.debian.org/CD/vendors/info Debian does not sell any products. Usually, it's DDs or Debian affiliated people who have decided to produce and hand out stuff, partially even sell it at more or less cost price. The revenue is then donated to the organisation that supports Debian. Even if the Debian UK Society will sell t-shirts, mugs, DVDs etc. it's technically not The Debian Project but the society of active Debian people who want to promote Debian and Free Software. Even if the Debian UK Society will represent the Debian Project formally, legally and fiscally in the UK, it's not the Debian Project. They should be free to do what they want to support and promote Debian and Free Software as long as they maintain their non-profit/charity status and obey the goals/charta. Regards, Joey -- We all know Linux is great... it does infinite loops in 5 seconds. -- Linus Torvalds -- Please respect the privacy of this mailing list. Archive: file://master.debian.org/~debian/archive/debian-private/ To UNSUBSCRIBE, use the web form at http://db.debian.org/. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
Stephen Frost wrote: * Martin Schulze ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Usually, it's DDs or Debian affiliated people who have decided to produce and hand out stuff, partially even sell it at more or less cost price. The revenue is then donated to the organisation that supports Debian. Even if the Debian UK Society will sell t-shirts, mugs, DVDs etc. it's technically not The Debian Project but the society of active Debian people who want to promote Debian and Free Software. Even if the Debian UK Society will represent the Debian Project formally, legally and fiscally in the UK, it's not the Debian Project. They should be free to do what they want to support and promote Debian and Free Software as long as they maintain their non-profit/charity status and obey the goals/charta. I disagree. If they're going to represent the Debian Project, either formally, legally or fiscally in the UK, then they should report to the DPL and follow Debian policies. This means, in addition to other things, that they aren't free to do what they want. I certainly feel You should read more closely what I wrote, since that's not what I wrote. I'll quote it for you: | legally and fiscally in the UK, it's not the Debian Project. They should | be free to do what they want to support and promote Debian and Free | Software as long as they maintain their non-profit/charity status and | obey the goals/charta. The charta of the association may need to be approved by Debian (DPL should be sufficient) due to the Debian trademark. However, since it is used descriptively, this may not be required. that they should not be allowed to spend money donated to the Debian Project without approval of the DPL/Debian. I guess that legally this is not possible. In several countries it is not possible for charities / non-profit associations to do earmarking of donations which SPI is doing. Hence, this may depend on the goodwill of the association and the compatibility of the association's goals with the goals of Debian. Anyway, since we're discussing selling of items (at cost price) do we really want to continue doing this by random people who may keep the reveue, independent of how little it'll be? It's not like DUS is setting up a shop and stuff, but provides what users want at a Debian booth, in order to support Debian and promote Free Sofware. Regards, Joey -- We all know Linux is great... it does infinite loops in 5 seconds. -- Linus Torvalds -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
Martin Schulze [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The charta of the association may need to be approved by Debian (DPL should be sufficient) due to the Debian trademark. However, since it is used descriptively, this may not be required. Exactly. It's a similar situation, in trademark terms, to the DCC Alliance. Same public standard should be applied to both. [...] that they should not be allowed to spend money donated to the Debian Project without approval of the DPL/Debian. I guess that legally this is not possible. In several countries it is not possible for charities / non-profit associations to do earmarking of donations which SPI is doing. [...] In England, it's not only possible, but charities are advised to do something similar, called restricted donations in the Charity Commission Statement of Recommended Practice. DUS is hoping not to register as a charity and its constitution doesn't require it to be non-profit, last I knew. (Hey, I once ran a business that made a loss: could I have renamed it debian?) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK (was Re: What the DFSG really says about trademarks)
MJ Ray wrote: Daniel Ruoso [EMAIL PROTECTED] skribis: So, are we going to stablish the criterias for organizations to have the right of using the Debian name? Like a type of fair-use? Not me in the forseeable. spi-trademark would be the next step, but it was just my opinion on a question you asked. [...] ... so ... Couldn't we just avoid the problem by acting reactivelly? I mean, do you really think that DUS is not a fair-use of the Debian trademark? No, it's a business trading as debian, sprung on its members as a done deal. As Phil Hands posted about DCC, it seems either malicious or stupid and either way I don't see how we can trust them to be issuing statements which will be perceived by the world to have come from the project. Ah, so you're drawing a link between DCC, a group who have placed the words Debian and Core in their name without considering the obvious consequences, and the group of Debian folks in the UK who have decided that it was reasonable to refer to themselves variously as debian-uk (as in the mailing list) or more recently, and pretty much solely for the purposes of opening a bank account, as The Debian UK Society. The mailing list has been going at least five years, without anyone complaining that the name was misleading. At least one SPI board member is subscribed to the list, and it is the first google hit for Debian UK, so we've not been making a secret of this. The issue of the bank account has been discussed since June 2004, and you've contributed to the discussion throughout, so claiming that this has been done in a precipitate manner is just nonsense. Debian-UK hasn't issued any press releases -- If we did, they'd be discussed in public in advance, and I cannot imagine us issuing any except perhaps along the lines of Software Patents stifle Innovation or similar. On the whole I think such things would be better coming from Debian as a whole, unless there was an exclusively UK based issue that needed comment. The closest you could probably get to claiming that anything has been done in the name of The Debian UK Society would be this: http://www.computerworld.dk/usarticles.asp?USArticleID=9894 in which I was misquoted as having claimed to be chairman ... of debian (Doh!), and then had my quotes mangled into ungrammatical English *sigh*. Lesson learned -- I won't be mentioning The Debian UK Society in earshot of the press again (but at least what was left of what I said was innocuous, and it did get Debian a name check :-) Anyway, so far you seem to be crying in the wilderness about this (unlike the DCC issue, which has attracted quite a lot of comment). This makes me wonder at your motives. Your recent actions don't appear to be particularly constructive. Cheers, Phil. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Debian UK (was Re: What the DFSG really says about trademarks)
Philip Hands [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] Ah, so you're drawing a link between DCC, a group who have placed the words Debian and Core in their name without considering the obvious consequences, and the group of Debian folks in the UK who have decided that it was reasonable to refer to themselves variously as debian-uk (as in the mailing list) or more recently, and pretty much solely for the purposes of opening a bank account, as The Debian UK Society. Well, there's a BIG similarity: * both took the debian name for business use without consent; and some differences, including: * DCC asked its members before counting them as members; * DCC itself looks loss-making, while DUS aims for break-even; * DCC probably won't be trading itself (but its members may want to trade on its name), while DUS is a trading business; * DUS claims the confusing brand Debian-UK as well as its name. DCC is less of a business than DUS by some measures! If DUS is solely for the purposes of opening a bank account, why the blue blazes do you need to have automatic membership and assert unrequested association with 70+ people? [...] The issue of the bank account has been discussed since June 2004, and you've contributed to the discussion throughout, so claiming that this has been done in a precipitate manner is just nonsense. There was a meeting announced simply as a Pub Meet in http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/pipermail/debian-uk/2005-February/010223.html and then afterwards, it was announced in http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/pipermail/debian-uk/2005-March/010251.html that all UK DDs are now members of this botched organisation. What were you thinking, besides Mmm, beer.? The closest you could probably get to claiming that anything has been done in the name of The Debian UK Society would be this: http://www.computerworld.dk/usarticles.asp?USArticleID=9894 in which I was misquoted as having claimed to be chairman ... of debian (Doh!), and then had my quotes mangled into ungrammatical English *sigh*. So, the appearance of Phil Hands (Debian-UK) on the schedules at http://www.affs.org.uk/affsac-2005.html was a drunken vision? (For those who know my past involvement with AFFS, I'd resigned, didn't organise the conference or that schedule.) Basically, if DUS keeps calling itself Debian-UK, this is likely to happen again and again and again. Maybe mistakes, but still going to be seen as Debian's actions. It's hard to correct errors in public comments: it's tricky to put toothpaste back in the tube. Simplest is for DUS not to name itself Debian-UK, however that's done. Anyway, so far you seem to be crying in the wilderness about this (unlike the DCC issue, which has attracted quite a lot of comment). This makes me wonder at your motives. Your recent actions don't appear to be particularly constructive. You've not been constructive either (LaLaLa indeed!) and I can't fix your organisation despite you. There's no need to wonder at my motives. I've written them several times: 1. I want no connection with DUS right now; including 2. I want DUS not to hold my personal details (especially not the inaccurate personal details it currently uses). How I see this can go forwards: a. DUS is repaired minimally, to be opt-in not opt-out, but your constitution offers no amendment, so I don't see how; b. willing DUS members reform as something sounder and don't try to contaminate other developers with their legal toys; or c. I slowly work through Not In Our Name-style tactics. Best wishes, -- MJ Ray (slef), K. Lynn, England, email see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
Scripsit MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] Well, there's a BIG similarity: * both took the debian name for business use without consent; You are pretty much the only one who asserts that Debian UK has anything at all to do with business. Despite being asked for clarification several times, you have spectacularly failed to document, or even argue for, this assertion. The rest of us conclude that your assertion is simply false, and that you somehow has a personal axe to grind which has no grounding in reality. -- Henning Makholm It's just as meaningful to say that our ancestors could easily have been very much like squirrels. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK (was Re: What the DFSG really says about trademarks)
[ I've been trying to let this stuff drop. *sigh* ] On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 01:49:01PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote: rant snipped You've not been constructive either (LaLaLa indeed!) and I can't fix your organisation despite you. There's no need to wonder at my motives. I've written them several times: 1. I want no connection with DUS right now; including 2. I want DUS not to hold my personal details (especially not the inaccurate personal details it currently uses). Mark, you keep on mentioning this. Precisely what personal details do you think D-UK holds about you, either correct or incorrect? How I see this can go forwards: a. DUS is repaired minimally, to be opt-in not opt-out, but your constitution offers no amendment, so I don't see how; b. willing DUS members reform as something sounder and don't try to contaminate other developers with their legal toys; or c. I slowly work through Not In Our Name-style tactics. d. You could grow up... -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.[EMAIL PROTECTED] Mature Sporty Personal More Innovation More Adult A Man in Dandism Powered Midship Specialty signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian UK (was Re: What the DFSG really says about trademarks)
On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 02:40:14PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote: Mark, you keep on mentioning this. Precisely what personal details do you think D-UK holds about you, either correct or incorrect? I'm pretty sure that's it right there. And getting people's names wrong when replying to email is really quite pitiful... -- .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield : :' : http://www.debian.org/ | `. `' | `- -- | signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian UK (was Re: What the DFSG really says about trademarks)
Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 02:40:14PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote: Mark, you keep on mentioning this. Precisely what personal details do you think D-UK holds about you, either correct or incorrect? I'm pretty sure that's it right there. And getting people's names wrong when replying to email is really quite pitiful... It's his name. It may not be what he prefers to be called, but that's an entirely separate issue. -- Matthew Garrett | [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK (was Re: What the DFSG really says about trademarks)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 02:40:14PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote: Mark, you keep on mentioning this. Precisely what personal details do you think D-UK holds about you, either correct or incorrect? I'm pretty sure that's it right there. And getting people's names wrong when replying to email is really quite pitiful... Interesting, I've worked with MJ Ray, and his name is DEFINATELY Mark. Is it wrong to address someone by there name these days? Thanks, - -- Brett Parker web: http://www.sommitrealweird.co.uk/ email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDHZ9vEh8oWxevnjQRAmKzAKCJRThf/lxe0X7L2o0Bnm4u5wnM6gCfZqqT i0z31uyIvBGPcuXwCi0w8zA= =OeVq -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
* Henning Makholm ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Scripsit MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] Well, there's a BIG similarity: * both took the debian name for business use without consent; You are pretty much the only one who asserts that Debian UK has anything at all to do with business. Despite being asked for clarification several times, you have spectacularly failed to document, or even argue for, this assertion. The rest of us conclude that your assertion is simply false, and that you somehow has a personal axe to grind which has no grounding in reality. I'd have to disagree with this. It's certainly commercial in what it does and that's been frowned upon by DDs for Debian/SPI in the US. Also, just because there aren't more people saying it looks like a business doesn't mean it isn't one. Also, who exactly is 'the rest of us'? It certainly doesn't include me and I'd claim that it doesn't include anyone but you. If there are people who specifically agree with you then let them speak for themselves. Thanks, Stephen signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian UK (was Re: What the DFSG really says about trademarks)
* Steve McIntyre ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: [ I've been trying to let this stuff drop. *sigh* ] I'm quite sure you'd appriciate it being dropped entirely and for you to be able to go on your merry way doing whatever you'd like. Unfortunately, life doesn't quite work that way. :) d. You could grow up... Gee, that's a terribly useless response. Thanks, Stephen signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian UK
On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 10:01:12AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: * Henning Makholm ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Scripsit MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] Well, there's a BIG similarity: * both took the debian name for business use without consent; You are pretty much the only one who asserts that Debian UK has anything at all to do with business. Despite being asked for clarification several times, you have spectacularly failed to document, or even argue for, this assertion. The rest of us conclude that your assertion is simply false, and that you somehow has a personal axe to grind which has no grounding in reality. I'd have to disagree with this. It's certainly commercial in what it does and that's been frowned upon by DDs for Debian/SPI in the US. Also, just because there aren't more people saying it looks like a business doesn't mean it isn't one. It's just a more formal, more accountable situation than what was happening before when Steve shoved Debian money into a shoebox under his bed. It's not there as an evil overlord business and participants on debian-uk are bored silly explaining this over and over. Still Mark [0] persists in grinding his axe. Hell he's even said he's going to on this list: ``c. I slowly work through Not In Our Name-style tactics.'' The supposed business is selling things like Debian CDs and DVDs and t-shirts with Debian emblazened on them. I can't honestly see why anyone on this list would object to that. Do you Stephen? It's all about promoting Debian in all the right ways by going to expos and events in the UK. I don't understand why Mark is so against this promotion of Debian, funding of some Debian related trips and yes, occasionally bits of sustenance by way of thanks for hard working people manning an expo stand. I just don't get it. Nothing here is going to hurt Debian; the DPL got dragged into the debate and has approved the use of the trademark; and the people involved (Steve, Phil, Vince, others who man the stall year in year out) get their hard and well justified work derided in public. I realise that money can be very devisive but these are relatively small amounts of money used well for the good of Debian. How MJ Ray can kick up so much fuss about this and still claim to be working for Debian and Free Software is beyond me. Also, who exactly is 'the rest of us'? It certainly doesn't include me and I'd claim that it doesn't include anyone but you. If there are people who specifically agree with you then let them speak for themselves. Do you really want this to turn into a whole thread of I see no problem with Debian UK either! ? [0] http://db.debian.org can't be wrong can it? -- --( Just wait. My crystal ball is infallible. -- )-- Simon ( Linus ) Nomis Htag.pl 0.0.22 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian UK
Scripsit Stephen Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Henning Makholm ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: You are pretty much the only one who asserts that Debian UK has anything at all to do with business. Despite being asked for clarification several times, you have spectacularly failed to document, or even argue for, this assertion. I'd have to disagree with this. It's certainly commercial in what it does and that's been frowned upon by DDs for Debian/SPI in the US. As far as I can see in this thread, no concrete example of behavior that could be characterized as commercial had been brought forward. -- Henning Makholm I Guds Faders namn, och Sonens, och den Helige Andes! Bevara oss från djävulens verk och från Muhammeds, den förbannades, illfundigheter! Med dig är det värre än med någon annan, ty att lyssna till Muhammed är det värsta av allt.
Re: Debian UK
* Henning Makholm ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Scripsit Stephen Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Henning Makholm ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: You are pretty much the only one who asserts that Debian UK has anything at all to do with business. Despite being asked for clarification several times, you have spectacularly failed to document, or even argue for, this assertion. I'd have to disagree with this. It's certainly commercial in what it does and that's been frowned upon by DDs for Debian/SPI in the US. As far as I can see in this thread, no concrete example of behavior that could be characterized as commercial had been brought forward. You might want to check on the definition of 'commercial' then. Apparently you're using some definition that the rest of the world isn't. Thanks, Stephen signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian UK
Simon Huggins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's just a more formal, more accountable situation than what was happening before when Steve shoved Debian money into a shoebox under his bed. Is it any more accountable to hold an AGM if you belittle the idea of using it as an AGM? No, that's a sham. Lest you forget, I dislike bureaucracy, but I also know some of the implications of participating in voluntary organisations because I've been doing it for years. GMs are a necessary part of accountability. (There's also the problem of DUS not solving well the problem of Steve getting hit by a bus, but that's not this discussion now.) It's not there as an evil overlord business and participants on debian-uk are bored silly explaining this over and over. Still Mark [0] persists in grinding his axe. Hell he's even said he's going to on this list: ``c. I slowly work through Not In Our Name-style tactics.'' The other options work if DUS stops asserting involuntary membership. [...] I don't understand why Mark is so against this promotion of Debian, funding of some Debian related trips and yes, occasionally bits of sustenance by way of thanks for hard working people manning an expo stand. [...] The promotion of Debian is most welcome. The potential for harm to the Debian name and waste of raised funds is there too. Will you only promote debian if you can trade as Debian-UK? Nothing here is going to hurt Debian; [...] You can predict the future now? How MJ Ray can kick up so much fuss about this and still claim to be working for Debian and Free Software is beyond me. If this episode makes anyone actually seek good advice *BEFORE* setting up a free software volunteer organisation, then it will have been worth it, in my opinion. I just wish DUS had. It's not like there's any shortage of good examples available. Even if we're voluntary, there's no excuse for being sloppy. Thanks, -- MJR/slef -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
Henning Makholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Scripsit MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] Well, there's a BIG similarity: * both took the debian name for business use without consent; You are pretty much the only one who asserts that Debian UK has anything at all to do with business. Despite being asked for clarification several times, you have spectacularly failed to document, or even argue for, this assertion. What documentation would you like? English law does not require private unincorporated businesses like DUS to declare anything formal in public, but the treasurers' reports show their business activities. As previously argued, DUS is an enterprise generating income from commercial sale of goods - a business. It uses volunteers and may be a social enterprise in English jargon, generating money to be used for good deeds, but it is still a business. The rest of us conclude that your assertion is simply false, and that Rest of us? Are the lurkers supporting you in email? ;-) you somehow has a personal axe to grind which has no grounding in reality. Yes, I've a personal axe, but it's based on this real event: I was told I had been made a member of a new UK unincorporated association based on db.d.o data. Even if it wasn't a business, involuntary membership violates some basic principles, including privacy of personal life and freedom of association. There's an article by Wino J.M. van Veen, Associate Law Professor of Free University of Amsterdam, in International Journal of Not-for-profit Law online: I am unaware of any legislation that allows involuntary membership of an association on the basis of the Articles of Association or other constitutive documents of an association or other legal entity established under private law. http://www.icnl.org/JOURNAL/vol3iss1/ar_wvPRINT.htm Is DUS's involuntary membership even legal? I don't know. Do you like sloppy orgs called themselves debian? :-/ Amazed, -- MJR/slef -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian UK
* Simon Huggins ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: It's just a more formal, more accountable situation than what was happening before when Steve shoved Debian money into a shoebox under his bed. Things have gotten muddled though and that's the problem. There's a number of issues here: 1) Holding money in the UK on behalf of Debian 2) Selling t-shirts and whatnot 3) The name issue with 'Debian-UK' 4) The 'opt-out' membership 5) The beer-bashes 6) The bank account For my part, I think #1, #3 and #6 go just fine together. I don't think anyone would disagree with that. #2 and #5 work fine together also but shouldn't be done under something claiming close ties to Debian. The monies should also be seperated. If the selling-t-shirts folks want to donate to Debian, that's fine, but the Debian side should only be spending money at direct orders of the DPL and should be reporting the holdings and expenses and balance information to the DPL (and/or maybe SPI? Not sure, that'd need to be worked out). #4 was just a bad idea, and really should be corrected. Figure out who wants to be a part of it and who doesn't and update the membership accordingly. Accept the fact that not all DDs in the UK will want to be a part of it. It's not there as an evil overlord business and participants on debian-uk are bored silly explaining this over and over. Still Mark [0] persists in grinding his axe. Hell he's even said he's going to on this list: ``c. I slowly work through Not In Our Name-style tactics.'' Businesses are not inherently evil but they do have different priorities than Debian. I don't follow debian-uk and it certainly doesn't sound like it's actually been resolved in an acceptable way regardless. The supposed business is selling things like Debian CDs and DVDs and t-shirts with Debian emblazened on them. I can't honestly see why anyone on this list would object to that. Do you Stephen? Sure, just the same as people object to Debian/SPI selling CDs, DVDs or t-shirts, or actually spending money for that matter. There's a number of issues involved when you start doing things commercially. Certainly the first one is 'what is the priority'? Another is, does this unfairly compete against others? Personally, I think Debian/SPI should be selling things but I respect that the apparent majority disagrees with me on that. Certainly if Debian/SPI isn't going to do it then Debian/SPI in other countries shouldn't either. That's what Debian-UK comes across to me as- the UK branch of Debian. It seems you'd like for it to be percieved that way as well. It's not if it's selling things. It's all about promoting Debian in all the right ways by going to expos and events in the UK. This seems a bit orthogonal to the other issues, but I'll bite. Honestly, I'd rather see 'Debian' on a list of expo attendees than 'Debian-UK'. It's about promoting Debian, so go there as Debian, and act as Debian does. I don't understand why Mark is so against this promotion of Debian, funding of some Debian related trips and yes, occasionally bits of sustenance by way of thanks for hard working people manning an expo stand. I just don't get it. I don't think it's appropriate to put words into other mouths. You're drawing a conclusion there which is almost certainly incorrect and attempting to draw an 'us vs. them' line. Let's leave such foolishness at the door, please. Nothing here is going to hurt Debian; the DPL got dragged into the debate and has approved the use of the trademark; and the people involved (Steve, Phil, Vince, others who man the stall year in year out) get their hard and well justified work derided in public. The DPL has only approved the use of the mark for the interim. Do not be suprised if that use is later recinded, in fact, if I were you I'd prepare for it or even better take action to make it a non-issue. I realise that money can be very devisive but these are relatively small amounts of money used well for the good of Debian. Even small amounts of money can change people's priorities. How MJ Ray can kick up so much fuss about this and still claim to be working for Debian and Free Software is beyond me. Let's stop with the garbage, please. It doesn't help us come up with an acceptable solution. Also, who exactly is 'the rest of us'? It certainly doesn't include me and I'd claim that it doesn't include anyone but you. If there are people who specifically agree with you then let them speak for themselves. Do you really want this to turn into a whole thread of I see no problem with Debian UK either! ? No, I'd much rather people not make blatently false claims. Thanks, Stephen signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian UK
On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 04:17:34PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote: Simon Huggins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's just a more formal, more accountable situation than what was happening before when Steve shoved Debian money into a shoebox under his bed. Is it any more accountable to hold an AGM if you belittle the idea of using it as an AGM? No, that's a sham. Lest you forget, I dislike bureaucracy, but I also know some of the implications of participating in voluntary organisations because I've been doing it for years. GMs are a necessary part of accountability. Every post of yours on this subject, in my opinion, shows you *adore* bureaucracy or you wouldn't persist in this mindnumbingly dull debate over a point which has no relevance to -project any more (given the grant of the trademark use). I note you didn't turn up to the AGM to try to put your point across - I can only assume that that wasn't a very convenient way of causing trouble for the society and that you prefer reaching a larger audience this way. It's not there as an evil overlord business and participants on debian-uk are bored silly explaining this over and over. Still Mark [0] persists in grinding his axe. Hell he's even said he's going to on this list: ``c. I slowly work through Not In Our Name-style tactics.'' The other options work if DUS stops asserting involuntary membership. I still prefer option d where you realise that you're making a lot of fuss for no good reason and stop. [...] I don't understand why Mark is so against this promotion of Debian, funding of some Debian related trips and yes, occasionally bits of sustenance by way of thanks for hard working people manning an expo stand. [...] The promotion of Debian is most welcome. We would be most glad then if you would stop trying to harm it by involving all the members in a stupid flamewar on -project then. Trust me you are visibly doing harm. You do realise that you are potentially making people think twice before they sell t-shirts/CDs elsewhere right? Nothing here is going to hurt Debian; [...] You can predict the future now? No, I trust the people. Based on previous experience where they could have just *taken* the money and things weren't so public. How many fine, upstanding UK Debian Developers have to stand up and say Steve, Phil and Vince are great guys and should be allowed to continue what they've been doing without MJ's harrassment before you stop? How MJ Ray can kick up so much fuss about this and still claim to be working for Debian and Free Software is beyond me. If this episode makes anyone actually seek good advice *BEFORE* setting up a free software volunteer organisation, then it will have been worth it, in my opinion. I just wish DUS had. It's not like there's any shortage of good examples available. Even if we're voluntary, there's no excuse for being sloppy. You had your chance for input as Phil has pointed out. It's only recently you've adopted these attempts to destroy the good work that is happening in Debian's name in the UK; yes, in Debian's name, as it rightly should being Debian work promoting Debian! If you're just pissed off about the Mark - MJ thing then this really isn't the way to get back at people for your own personal grievances. I'm done now. I can see I can't reason with you but please reconsider your position. -- _[EMAIL PROTECTED] -+*+- fou, con et anglais _ (_) AAAhhh, I see you're using the Machine that goes Bing. (_) (_) (_) \______/ signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian UK
* Simon Huggins ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Every post of yours on this subject, in my opinion, shows you *adore* bureaucracy or you wouldn't persist in this mindnumbingly dull debate over a point which has no relevance to -project any more (given the grant of the trademark use). I hate to have to point it out, but the grant was for the interim and this is actually a pretty decent place to try to show some of the concerns DDs have that will hopefully be incorporated into the Debian/SPI trademark policy which will quite possibly end up recinding the interim trademark grant. So, don't try to use the excuse that the DPL gave you an interim trademark license as showing that what you're doing is right. That's not how it works. We would be most glad then if you would stop trying to harm it by involving all the members in a stupid flamewar on -project then. Trust me you are visibly doing harm. Attempting to work out the concerns of DDs and how the Debian trademark should be used isn't exactly a 'stupid flamewar'. It almost certainly will help Debian in the end as it's been shown that not having a clear trademark policy certainly hurts Debian. You do realise that you are potentially making people think twice before they sell t-shirts/CDs elsewhere right? It'd be a very good thing to have people think twice before starting up an organization with 'Debian' in the name. Perhaps things like DCC could have been avoided then. Nothing here is going to hurt Debian; [...] You can predict the future now? No, I trust the people. Based on previous experience where they could have just *taken* the money and things weren't so public. Certainly there's more at stake here than just the money aspect. Debian's goal is not to raise money, after all. How many fine, upstanding UK Debian Developers have to stand up and say Steve, Phil and Vince are great guys and should be allowed to continue what they've been doing without MJ's harrassment before you stop? Being great guys doesn't necessairly mean that Debian's trademark policy should allow people to create businesses using the Debian mark, even if it's for selling t-shirts. You had your chance for input as Phil has pointed out. It's only recently you've adopted these attempts to destroy the good work that is happening in Debian's name in the UK; yes, in Debian's name, as it rightly should being Debian work promoting Debian! Yet, Debian doesn't sell t-shirts. I'm done now. I can see I can't reason with you but please reconsider your position. This seems to be the result of a number of these threads. It's not terribly useful. Thanks, Stephen signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian UK
Simon Huggins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I note you didn't turn up to the AGM to try to put your point across - I can only assume that [... conspiracy theory ...] Or you could assume that I dislike bureaucracy and drunken barbecues (I can't drink much) and spent our last bank holiday weekend of this year with my family instead. It would be closer to the truth. I sounded several people out and the reasonable people I asked (some of whom disagree with me) seemed not to be going to Cambridge either. We'd all been told the AGM would be a waste of time anyway: http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/pipermail/debian-uk/2005-August/010501.html and you've been stomping on any bugfix ideas from the outset: http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/pipermail/debian-uk/2005-August/010504.html [...] You do realise that you are potentially making people think twice before they sell t-shirts/CDs elsewhere right? I doubt it, but just in case they've missed the point, like you have: please sell debian t-shirts and CDs, please donate back to the project, but please don't call your business Debian yet. [...] How many fine, upstanding UK Debian Developers have to stand up and say Steve, Phil and Vince are great guys and should be allowed to continue what they've been doing without MJ's harrassment before you stop? That'd be irrelevant. Fix DUS however you want, but fix it. [...] You had your chance for input as Phil has pointed out. It's only recently you've adopted these attempts to destroy the good work that is happening in Debian's name in the UK; yes, in Debian's name, as it rightly should being Debian work promoting Debian! I did a bad job of communicating on several occasions, but I think it was a tough sell from when DUS was secretly formed. I did state on 10 August that I'd start using messier tactics to limit damage for me, so you had your chance for input too. If you're just pissed off about the Mark - MJ thing then this really isn't the way to get back at people for your own personal grievances. That's not a motive for this. I'm done now. I can see I can't reason with you but please reconsider your position. Your idea of reasoning seems to be a compromise by one side only. -- MJR/slef -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
