(Apologies to those who receive this multiple times - I wanted it to reach a
wide audience. Replies only to -project please, unless there is something
specific to another list that is more appropriate to discuss there.)
Hi everyone,
The Debian Women project is celebrating Software Freedom Day [1
Title: Sugestão
Olá!
Alguém que não tinha nada para fazer, numa de suas visitas ao Humor
Tadela não sei por que cargas d'água, lhe recomendou a seguinte
página:
"Piada Animada: Felizes Para Sempre?"
Não funcionou?
Não se desespere! Pegue o
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 th
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.
> >
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 th
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
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 see
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
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 a
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
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 w
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.ch
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
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 i
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
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, mean
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 j
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
o
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 unincor
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 po
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 [
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
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
* 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. [...]
>
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 repainti
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
> unaccep
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" he
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 [
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
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
> > > >
* 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 Debia
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 Deb
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 she
* 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
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 *thi
* 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 w
* 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 th
* 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 eve
* 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
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 t
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 chu
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 ser
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
> > > i
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...
* 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 kin
* 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 yo
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
* 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-pro
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
* 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 countrie
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
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
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-comm
* 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 seem
* 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 doe
* 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 pr
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
>
* 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
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
* 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 p
* 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
> > develo
* 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 barb
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
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? [...]
>
>>Y
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.
Debatin
-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 generatin
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 S
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
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://
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
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 somew
71 matches
Mail list logo
