On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 6:55 PM Scott Kitterman <debian@kitterman.com> wrote: > > On Wednesday, March 18, 2020 6:41:42 PM EDT Brian Gupta wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 4:30 PM Neil McGovern <neilm@debian.org> wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 12:57:55AM +0800, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > > > > * Louis-Philippe Véronneau <pollo@debian.org> [2020-03-18 12:52]: > > > > > Would you care to elaborate on what "the Yorba determination" is? I > > > > > couldn't find anything online about this... > > > > > > > > There was a time when the IRS didn't approve any new 501(c)(3) > > > > applications for open source related organizations and basically put > > > > them on ice. > > > > > > > > I thought this got resolved though in the meantime (years ago). > > > > > > > > https://blogs.gnome.org/jnelson/2014/06/30/the-new-501c3-and-the-future-> > > of-free-software-in-the-united-states/ https://opensource.org/node/840 > > > > > > The two links from Martin are probably the best background reading. the > > > tldr versions is: making FOSS is not enough to gain 501c3 status by > > > itself. > > > > Applications for non-profit status need to be done carefully as they are > > scrutinized in most jurisdictions. Looking at the BOLO, it seems the IRS is > > particularly on the lookout for commercially developed Open Source Software. > > > > "The members of the organizations are usually the for-profit business or > > for-profit support technicians of the software." > > > > I think Debian has a very good case here, and at least to my eyes doesn't > > fit that description. I think it's worth the effort to try. As they say > > "nothing ventured, nothing gained." > > > > Cheers, > > Brian > > Well, I think there's a down side risk here too. If Debian were to apply to > create it's own foundation in the US (certainly in the US, possibly anywhere), > that would be a very clear signal to SPI that we were planning to replace > them. So we file for the new non-profit and spend possibly years without an > alternative to SPI while we've already told them they are going to be > replaced. > > That probably isn't motivating for a high level of service. Then if we get > turned down, we get to go back to them and say "That thing where we were going > to fire you? Can we pretend that never happened?". Not a great position to be > in. Many Debian Project Members, myself included, are contributing members of SPI, and I for one, certainly plan to remain one, regardless of any plans to establish Debian Foundations. I also consider the Debian Project Members on SPI's board kindred spirits and even friends who have similar interests. I very much hope for their continued success. Remember that over half of the SPI board are also Debian Project Members, and are sure to understand our needs. We are NOT abandoning the relationship, and we will certainly continue working with SPI whether or not we decide to pursue our own Foundations. At the end of the day, SPI is a professionally run organization, that would not punish one of their member projects for seeking the tailored services and organizational structure it needs. Thanks, Brian > I'd suggest we need to be far more certain that such a change is both needed > and likely to be successful. "Meh, let's give it a shot" isn't really a great > plan. > > Scott K
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature