[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Debian UK (was Re: What the DFSG really says about trademarks)

Daniel Ruoso <daniel@ruoso.com> skribis:
> Em Sex, 2005-09-02 =E0s 18:38 +0100, MJ Ray escreveu:
> > [...] I think charities should get some special consideration
> > because law enforces some level of openness and honour not
> > required of other organisations.
> I must remember that you're restrictive to UK law.

Did you mean that as agressively as I read it?

I'm not restrictive, but English law is what I'm most familiar
with, so if I generalise brokenly, or you use another place's
law, corrections or explanations are needed. Maybe I should
have named www.charitycommission.gov.uk before, for example.

Where do charities exist but not need any openness or honour?

> In Brasil, for
> instance, there is no such thing as "charity organization".

Then no groups would get special consideration from that
clause of my suggestion. What's the problem?

> So, a NGO (even a OCIP) is allowed to trade things, because the question
> (in the brazillian sense) is if there is profit or not.  I mean, selling
> something for a value greater than the cost is *not* profit. Profit (in
> the brazillian sense) is the value that is shared among share-holders
> after the balance.

That sounds more like dividends than profits to me. It's
debatable whether DUS's meals and booze-ups is paying members
dividends-in-kind or funding promotional events.

MJ Ray (slef), K. Lynn, England, email see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/

Reply to: