Re: Debian UK
Steve Langasek <firstname.lastname@example.org> 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:
"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
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
rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | email@example.com
technical director 251 Liverpool Road |
need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487