On 13/07/12 00:38, Luca Capello wrote:
Hi there! For the DPL, the original email is at: [🔎] email@example.com"><mid:[🔎] firstname.lastname@example.org> <https://lists.debian.ch/pipermail/community/2012/000839.html> On Thu, 12 Jul 2012 15:48:44 +0200, Daniel Pocock wrote:On 12/07/12 08:24, Gaudenz Steinlin wrote:Thanks Daniel for the initial translation. I commited your version to the debian-ch git repository . I also did some improvements. I also have some questions, see below:  http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=debian-ch/docs.git;a=summary[...]§ 8 AGENCIES -- DEBIAN PROJECT LEADER (DPL) The Debian Project Leader may direct the way in which the assets held bythe german version says "all the assets", corrected in gitthe association are used. (translation note: does not distinguish project assets from assocation's operating account/assets)Why should it or what's the difference?Clause 2.2: "The Society holds on behalf of the Debian project assets in Switzerland and Liechtenstein." In particular, "on behalf of" gives the suggestion that it is holding assets for a third party^^^^^^^^^^^^^ FTR, there is no *legal* third party given that AFAIK Debian as an official association does not exist.
I agree that nobody has asserted that Debian exists as a legal entity. However, these points may be relevant:
- debian.org is registered to SPI
- From www.debian.org: "Debian is a registered trademark of Software in the Public Interest, Inc. "
Someone could argue that Debian is therefore a trading name or business name of SPI, and therefore SPI is the legal entity. I feel it is better to make such things clear rather than leaving it for someone to dispute in the future.
Such assets may be distinct from the assets of the association: - someone makes a donation to the association: asset of debian.ch - but of course, debian.ch can choose to use this money for the Debian project^^^^^^^^^^^^^ If I read correctly the Debian Constitution v1.4, this is only possible if the donation is specifically marked with a "also for non-Debian stuff", see § 9.2.2: <http://www.debian.org/devel/constitution#item-9> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- 9. Assets held in trust for Debian In most jurisdictions around the world, the Debian project is not in a position to directly hold funds or other property. Therefore, property has to be owned by any of a number of organisations as detailed in §9.2. Traditionally, SPI was the sole organisation authorized to hold property and monies for the Debian Project. SPI was created in the U.S. to hold money in trust there. SPI and Debian are separate organisations who share some goals. Debian is grateful for the legal support framework offered by SPI. 9.1. Relationship with Associated Organizations 1. Debian Developers do not become agents or employees of organisations holding assets in trust for Debian, or of each other, or of persons in authority in the Debian Project, solely by the virtue of being Debian Developers. A person acting as a Developer does so as an individual, on their own behalf. Such organisations may, of their own accord, establish relationships with individuals who are also Debian developers. 9.2. Authority 1. An organisation holding assets for Debian has no authority regarding Debian's technical or nontechnical decisions, except that no decision by Debian with respect to any property held by the organisation shall require it to act outside its legal authority. 2. Debian claims no authority over an organisation that holds assets for Debian other than that over the use of property held in trust for Debian. 9.3. Trusted organisations Any donations for the Debian Project must be made to any one of a set of organisations designated by the Project leader (or a delegate) to be authorized to handle assets to be used for the Debian Project. Organisations holding assets in trust for Debian should undertake reasonable obligations for the handling of such assets.
This seems messy to me: a real trust must have a beneficiary, and a beneficiary may need to have some legal status of it's own.
Debian maintains a public List of Trusted Organisations that accept donations and hold assets in trust for Debian (including both tangible property and intellectual property) that includes the commitments those organisations have made as to how those assets will be handled. --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- IMHO if the above is not clear from the current bylaws we need to clearly define it, considering obvious that: a) the money needed to run the association is the only possible exception; b) "for the Debian project" means all kind of activities related to Debian, including BSPs, release parties, (Mini-)DebConfs, etc... Moreover, I would say that debian.ch SHOULD USE the money it has for the Debian project only, for the very simple reason of the 'debian' word present in the association name (see the trademark remark below).
I don't want to dispute any of that - just to clarify it
- someone buys a T-shirt, the T-shirt has the Debian logo, the logo is owned by SPI, so the money from the sale may be considered an asset of the Debian project from the moment of the salePlease, the next time be a bit more precise about which logo are you talking about, since there are three different ones I see three different situations: <http://www.debian.org/logos> 1) the plain swirl can be used by anyone under the "Debian Open Use Logo License" without any need to credit or give something back to SPI; 2) the "Debian" word, albeit being under the same license as the swirl, is trademarked by SPI, so there should be some restrictions; 3) the "full" logo (the swirl with the ) is under the "Debian Official Use Logo License" proprietary license, which grant its use for no-profit merchandise only to official members of the Debian Project. If I am correct, this means that using it as debian.ch would be not allowed, which is IMHO wrong since debian.ch has already an official relation with the Debian Project (as any other Trusted Organizations), so I guess if this should be corrected in the license text.I think this relationship between the association and the project is not clear enough in the document - but the important point to remember is that the association is an independent entity.IANAL, but IMHO the latter is not true from a legal point of view, given that debian.ch has been allowed the use of the Debian trademark: <http://www.debian.org/trademark> <http://lists.debian.org/20110418093509.GA23640@upsilon.cc> <http://bugs.debian.org/623196>
Maybe the translated document should include an appendix with those details, and some reference to it in section 2?
Thx, bye, Gismo / Luca_______________________________________________ community mailing list email@example.com https://lists.debian.ch/mailman/listinfo/community