29 Jan
2004
29 Jan
'04
11:15 p.m.
I'd like
to have a clearer understanding of what the legal>
situation of the Consortium is (or is planned to be).
At the moment it has no
legal status, in any country. This is what I
was planning: 1. Register post office box (here in the UK) as the
contact address of
the linuxaudio.org consortium (I've sent off the forms, I'm just
waiting for the Royal Mail to do their bit). It would be great to
have an office for the project and staff, but realistically the
resources aren't in place yet.
<snip>
From there on my management role will end, as
democratically speaking
I wouldn't be able to supervise myself. It's then up to the
Management Board to decide if they want to form a legal organisation,
replace me with someone who could do a better job etc etc.
But if your role would end, and you wouldn't be able to supervise,
who would handle the post then?
2. Contact all the member projects to make sure they
have named a
representative for the Management Board, subscribe these people to
the Management mailing list, and announce the formation of the Board.
Consider it a troll (again) but i have to say this:
From a legal point of view, it's just a bunch of
projects and companies
listed on a site, the domain is entirely in the hands of
Daniel.
I just can't understand why there's a need for a virtual consortium under a
such attractive and useful domain.
An organisation should be the last step in promoting linuxaudio.
There are lots of issues which need to be solved before an organisation can be
established.
And i fear that it will involve another mailing-list, what's worse, a private one.
The managment board mailing list.
As the software is open source itself, why is there any need for private mailinglists?
Is there anything we should hide?
On the subject of subdomains, I think it's a good
idea, but I am keen
to avoid duplication of effort.
<snip>
As for the domain name, I did register it myself and
it currently has
my home address on the WHOIS records. As soon as I know what the post
office box number is, I will change the records. There has to be a
named contact for billing and technical though, so if no-one objects
I'll leave myself as the contact for billing for now.
I don't want
the domain to expire in a couple of years time because no-on else
remembered to renew it!
Seems like all my words were worthless. I'd register it and redirect it to LAD (and
LAU) homepage first.
Then i'd just pester Joern with the plans i have mentioned before.
Worst case scenario - it would end up pointing to LAD and LAU homepage.
Marek
30 Jan
30 Jan
1:07 a.m.
New subject: linuxaudio.org
On Thu, 2004-01-29 at 23:28, Marek Peteraj wrote:
As the software is open source itself, why is there
any need for private mailinglists?
Is there anything we should hide?
Hi Marek,
I haven't followed the whole of this argument, so I apologize if this
has been said before. Since linuxaudio is meant to mimic OSDL in some
respects I assume it will at time engage in business negotiations with
various parties. Such dealing are by nature confidential until they are
ready to be announced which explains the need for a private mailing list
for the linuxaudio.org board.
Christian
1:37 a.m.
New subject: linuxaudio.org
Hi Christian,
On Thu, 2004-01-29 at 23:16, Christian Fredrik Kalager Schaller wrote:
On Thu, 2004-01-29 at 23:28, Marek Peteraj wrote:
to be honest, i don't see a reason to go private if the source code
itself isn't proprietary. The problem is - who is going to negotiate if
there's no organisation in legal sense? Who are the members? A project
can't be a member since it can't be considered as an organisation though
developers and other people helping out in a project do organise
themselves.
A project is:
"WordNet (r) 2.0"
project
n 1: any piece of work that is undertaken or attempted; "he
prepared for great undertakings" syn: undertaking, task,
labor
"Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913)
2. That which is projected or designed; something intended or
devised; a scheme; a design; a plan.
So suppose we *have* a legal entity, who will be allowed to get in?
A legal entity, a natural person, both?
Since a project isn't an organisation, will the project leaders or contributors be
members of that consortium?
How many? All of them? The leading developers only?
If so, are both legal entities and natural persons allowed to enter then?
How is the organisation going to be organised in that case? How many members should it
have?
Will the members of a corporate body enter?
etc....
Since you're an active member of the gnome community, i'd like to know what you
think of a model similar to gnome foundation.
I'm much more inclined to that model personally.
Marek
As the software is open source itself, why is
there any need for private mailinglists?
Is there anything we should hide?
Hi Marek,
I haven't followed the whole of this argument, so I apologize if this
has been said before. Since linuxaudio is meant to mimic OSDL in some
respects I assume it will at time engage in business negotiations with
various parties. Such dealing are by nature confidential until they are
ready to be announced which explains the need for a private mailing list
for the linuxaudio.org board. 
1:43 p.m.
New subject: linuxaudio.org
But if your role would end, and you wouldn't be
able to supervise,
who would handle the post then?
Naturally the consortium would change its contact address to another
post office box or office which was more convenient for the new
director. I would of course forward on any post.
From a legal point of view, it's just a bunch of
projects and
companies listed on a site, the domain is entirely in the hands of
Daniel.
Quite true for the time being - which is why I'm trying to set up a
management board. The more time we spend arguing about the same
points, the less time there is for advocacy.
An organisation should be the last step in promoting
linuxaudio.
There we disagree.
And i fear that it will involve another mailing-list,
what's worse,
a private one. The managment board mailing list.
The management board mailing list will have closed membership for a
very good reason - democratic accountability. The archive will be
public of course.
Is there anything we should hide?
Personally I have nothing to hide. However, as Christian pointed out,
some people will want to have private discussions for reasons such as
commercial confidentiality. It's my expectation that before a large
organisation joined a group like linuxaudio.org, they would approach
certain people privately first to test the reaction - this is my
experience.
Seems like all my words were worthless.
So far you've had very little constructive criticism to offer, Marek.
Cheers
Daniel
7:34 p.m.
New subject: linuxaudio.org
On Fri, 2004-01-30 at 11:53, Daniel James wrote:
But what will it solve?
Not sure i understand.
But if your
role would end, and you wouldn't be able to supervise,
who would handle the post then?
Naturally the consortium would change its contact address to another
post office box or office which was more convenient for the new
director. I would of course forward on any post.
From a legal point of view, it's just a bunch
of projects and
companies listed on a site, the domain is entirely in the hands of
Daniel.
Quite true for the time being - which is why I'm trying to set up a
management board. The more time we spend arguing about the same
points, the less time there is for advocacy.
?
An organisation should be the last step in
promoting linuxaudio.
There we disagree.
And i fear that it will involve another
mailing-list, what's worse,
a private one. The managment board mailing list.
The management board mailing list will have closed membership for a
very good reason - democratic accountability. The archive will be
public of course.
I would *really* *like* to know what you consider as 'constructive
criticism', Daniel.
Marek
Is there anything we should hide?
Personally I have nothing to hide. However, as Christian pointed out,
some people will want to have private discussions for reasons such as
commercial confidentiality. It's my expectation that before a large
organisation joined a group like linuxaudio.org, they would approach
certain people privately first to test the reaction - this is my
experience.
Seems like all my words were worthless.
So far you've had very little constructive criticism to offer, Marek.
9:49 p.m.
New subject: linuxaudio.org
On Fri, 2004-01-30 at 19:47, Marek Peteraj wrote:
Not sure i understand. I assume it means it will ensure that each project gets one
vote and
that those who vote at least have some meritocratic claim to that vote.
Christian
On Fri, 2004-01-30 at 11:53, Daniel James wrote:
But what will it solve?
If part of linuxaudio's agenda is to get funding to be
used for the
enhancement of the pro-audio development platform on Linux then having a
formal organization is essential. Companies and persons who would want
to sponsor such things needs someone to make an arrangement with.
That is why GNOME has the GNOME Foundation, Ogg has Xiph and is why we
have OSDL.
But if
your role would end, and you wouldn't be able to supervise,
who would handle the post then?
Naturally the consortium would change its contact address to another
post office box or office which was more convenient for the new
director. I would of course forward on any post.
From a legal point of view, it's just a bunch
of projects and
companies listed on a site, the domain is entirely in the hands of
Daniel.
Quite true for the time being - which is why I'm trying to set up a
management board. The more time
we spend arguing about the same
points, the less time there is for advocacy.
?
An organisation should be the last step in
promoting linuxaudio.
There we disagree.
And i fear that it will involve another
mailing-list, what's worse,
a private one. The managment board mailing list.
The management board mailing list will have closed membership for a
very good reason - democratic accountability.
7391
days inactive
7392
days old
consortium@lists.linuxaudio.org
5 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Christian Fredrik Kalager Schaller -
Daniel James -
Marek Peteraj