29 Apr
2005
29 Apr
'05
7:43 p.m.
Dear Ivica, dear all,
some quick considerations. I more or less agree on all the points I
don't discuss, but I reserve the right to read such points more
carefully in the future (and disagree after that :).
>>>> "Ivica" == Ivica Ico Bukvic
<ico(a)fuse.net> writes:
Consider forming the foundation in a country
that is
Linux-friendly (i.e. no volatile patent support etc.) -- this
may not be that relevant, though. I would actually appreciate
some thoughts on this point.
Currently, any country in the European Union should be ok from this
point of view, *but* - as you are all very well aware - this might
change anytime soon, if a very large majority against software patents
doesn't build up in the European Parliament. Currently the European
Patent Office is granting patents on software (albeit masked as
technical devices) but it is quite questionable that such activity
would stand in court, when confronted with the European Patent
Convention.
India, Brasil, Chile and Venezuela, as far as I know, have taken very
clear positions *against* software patents, but I don't know anything
about creating consortiums/foundations in those countries.
In general, although I agree this is a very important point, I
wouldn't consider it a major criterion for choosing the place where to
establish the foundation. I would rather go for a place where
bureaucracy is minimal and where at least one member of the Board is
resident.
7) Generate consortium's logo *Necessary for
letterheads, media
exposure, etc. *Encourages consistency. *Would be available in
several sub-flavors for use by members as well as commercial
vendors (with appropriate licensing fee): a) "Made in GNU/Linux"
would be for projects which have been developed primarily on
Linux platform, b) logo without the aforementioned statement
would be for others. *The use of the logo by members would be
encouraged but not mandated. *The placement of logo (on the
website or inside the application) would be left to project
developer's discretion.
I am not sure whether this logo would constitute any kind of mark
(trademark, service mark, certification mark, whatever). Is that the
case?
8) Strengthen ties with other open-source foundations
(i.e. FSF)
*Ability to rely upon legal and other forms of help when
necessary
I have very good contacts with the Italian chapter of FSF*E* (Free
Software Foundation Europe) which was a partner of the AGNULA project
during the EC-funded lifetime, and still is the owner of the AGNULA
trademark. However, I would suggest:
(a) *never* call the FSF or the FSFE an "open source" foundation, lest
you want the FS-SWAT team to wake you up in the night and bring
you to the nearest re-education center (just joking! :);
(b) the not-so-clear-cut stance of the Linux Audio Consortium on Free
v Proprietary software makes the whole thing less palatable for
FSF(E), although I'm quite sure that cooperation on specific
strategic goals is absolutely possible;
I volunteer to help building any kind of relationship with FSFE what
might be desiderable, if people here think I'm the right person to do
it.
Ciao,
--
Andrea Glorioso sama(a)miu-ft.org +39 333 820 5723
.:: Media Innovation Unit - Firenze Tecnologia ::.
Conquering the world for fun and profit