On 01/03/10 20:40, Vincent Untz wrote:
Basil,
Le lundi 01 mars 2010, à 19:16 +1100, Basil Chupin a écrit :
On 01/03/10 18:53, Wolfgang Rosenauer wrote:
On 03/01/2010 08:43 AM, Basil Chupin wrote:
In which country is openSUSE registered as a not-for-profit organisation?
AFAIK work on this is on its way. The board is evaluating the options.
"Work on this is on its way"? Surely all this would have been done years ago?
Are you suggesting that the opensuse.org thing....falls short of legal requirements (in any country) to be termed a not-for-profit organisation (ie, .org)?
In any case, what is the legal basis (in whatever country) for having this "board"?
The bottom line is: if someone were to sue openSUSE for whatever reason, who would they be suing in a court of law? Novell or some nebulus entity called "the board" created by.....[aha, the "community", right!]?
I'm trying to understand what is the issue you're trying to discuss here. This is what I got (those are not real quotes, but I'm putting quote marks to show that it's not my opinion):
1) "the decision to support for-profit organizations by allowing them to make money on openSUSE is a decision that should be taken by Novell"
2) "the project is owned by Novell because it owns the trademark"
3) "the project is owned by Novell because Novell could be sued for something happening in openSUSE"
4) "the project is not owned by the community because there's no non-profit organization behind the project"
Which one(s) is/are the topic(s) you're discussing?
Vincent
All of them. But I am not 'discussing' them. I am only asking questions. To which I would have expected answers to have been asked and arrived at long ago by members of "the board", for example. The last time I tried to install (unsuccessfully) the Milestone 1 version of openSUSE 11.3 KDE Live I was asked the question of whether I accepted the (?)Conditions of Use Licence. This is not the first time this has been asked (in earlier versions of oS). This indicates to me that the Novell legal department is very much involved in the openSUSE distribution - or that people putting openSUSE are falling down in their job and putting in legal conditions into openSUSE which do not belong there. Which is it? No matter. I am not trying to blame anyone but I am trying to find out as to who actually MANAGES openSUSE, who CONTROLS it, WHO is the person who says, "The buck stops with ME"? WHO? I asked these questions in another thread (I think) but got the usual gooblydook about "community" yaba-yaba-yaba :-( . (Why do I ask these questions, you ask, and continue to ask? Because nobody has given me - no anyone else - a clear answer. Why hasn't a clear answer been given? Because I don't think anybody has the clear answer - except for the management of Novell and its legal advisers.) Just as a matter of curiosity, a person from Canonical asked a question - which is what started this thread - and how is his question being resolved and by whom? I have seen the responses to the OP but are the responses "official"? At least one of the responses appeared to indicate that 'the matter needed a decision by someone higher up the chain' or at least this is what I read into it. BC -- She was only a whisky maker but I loved her still. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org