On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 03:24:03PM +0100, Paul Waring wrote:
>On 14/09/15 15:08, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>> I'm also hoping to find sponsors again to cover some other costs for
>> the conference for things like food - please contact me if you can
>> help!
>
>I probably can't justify the cost of atten
On 14/09/15 15:08, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> I'm also hoping to find sponsors again to cover some other costs for
> the conference for things like food - please contact me if you can
> help!
I probably can't justify the cost of attending, but I'm happy to chip in
£100 towards sponsoring the event an
Hi,
On 16 August 2013 15:23, Paul Mellors wrote:
>> I'm organising a mini-conf in Cambridge for November this year. My
>> employer ARM has graciously volunteered to host people for 4 days for
>> a mix of sprint sessions and talks:
>> For more details and to sign up to attend, please visit the wi
On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 02:23:24PM +0100, Paul Mellors wrote:
>Hello All
>
>If it ok to paste that link into twitter/facebook etc to promote it?
>
>I can't make the event but can big it up a bit :)
Of course, yes please!
--
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.st...@einv
rwards to seeing lots of you in November!
>
> --
> Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.
> st...@einval.com
>
> ___
> Debian-uk maillist - debian...@chiark.greenend.org.uk
> http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/debian-uk
>
>
Philip Hands <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Why do you think that mail was a joke? [...]
The poor attempt at telepathy, claiming someone said "BTW" and ":-)"
then rounding off by confirming that a constitution is required if
you ask for a bank account type that requires a constitution
(and exclude o
MJ Ray wrote:
[...]
> In many
> circumstances, law says groups must apply for a decision,
> but DUS won't and I'm not sure whether the call reported in
> http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/pipermail/debian-uk/2005-August/010548.html
> really happened or was a joke like much
ty
to be helpful (or charitable?) is sometimes allowed.
The only way to decide for sure seems to be to apply to the
commissioners, and a court if necessary beyond that. In many
circumstances, law says groups must apply for a decision,
but DUS won't and I'm not sure whether the call repo
ssue for this organisation at present.
>
> VAT registration isn't the one you need to worry about. Debian-UK
> isn't going to be shifting that much money in a hurry.
>
> Corporation Tax is the one to worry about. The limit for that is only
> £10,000 per financial year. I just
he one you need to worry about. Debian-UK
isn't going to be shifting that much money in a hurry.
Corporation Tax is the one to worry about. The limit for that is only
£10,000 per financial year. I just ran a few quick projections based
on the reports in the [EMAIL PROTECTED] archives, and it'
Scripsit Rich Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> If that organisation operates for a period of time, then a court
> would need convincing that the members were not jointly and
> severally liable for the liabilities of that organisation.
I get more and more happy that I moved out of that country.
--
H
Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The charta of the association may need to be approved by Debian
> (DPL should be sufficient) due to the "Debian" trademark. However,
> since it is used descriptively, this may not be required.
Exactly. It's a similar situation, in trademark terms, to th
ation that supports Debian.
> >
> > Even if the Debian UK Society will sell t-shirts, mugs, DVDs etc.
> > it's technically not The Debian Project but the society of active
> > Debian people who want to promote Debian and Free Software.
> >
> > Even if the Debian
ated to the organisation that supports Debian.
Even if the Debian UK Society will sell t-shirts, mugs, DVDs etc.
it's technically not The Debian Project but the society of active
Debian people who want to promote Debian and Free Software.
Even if the Debian UK Society will represent the Debian
Philip Hands <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...]
> Is the data contained in the debian-keyring that relates to you inaccurate?
Not as far as I can tell. It's different to db.d.o and easier
to edit. It still has no assurance of following our country's
data protection principles, so careful how you use
MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Rich Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...]
>> So a charity for the benefit of Debian members would not work unless
>> Debian was a charity, which it can't be for the aforementioned political
>> reason.
>
> I thought the political exeception was most about see
MJ Ray wrote:
> Philip Hands <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...]
>
>>I'm rather surprised you've not managed to work that out on your own,
>>especially given the fact that numerous people have reacted with confusion
>>to your assertion that we're holding your personal details.
>
>
> I suspected it
Philip Hands <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...]
> I'm rather surprised you've not managed to work that out on your own,
> especially given the fact that numerous people have reacted with confusion
> to your assertion that we're holding your personal details.
I suspected it was that way around, but a
Hi,
* Philip Hands ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050907 12:09]:
> On reflection, I think we should ensure that the wording makes it clear
> that one has to express an interest in membership in order to be considered
> a member. I'll start a thread to that effect back on the debian-uk l
Rich Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...]
> So a charity for the benefit of Debian members would not work unless
> Debian was a charity, which it can't be for the aforementioned political
> reason.
I thought the political exeception was most about seeking to
directly influence legislation and w
Rich Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In the UK, charities are *heavily regulated*. It's easier to set up a
> Limited Company than a charity, and for good reason.
This is a known bug and attempts are being made to fix it
somewhat with the "light touch" approach to small charities:
http://www.ch
Philip Hands <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> On reflection, I think we should ensure that the wording makes it clear
> that one has to express an interest in membership in order to be considered
> a member. I'll start a thread to that effect back on the debian-uk list.
D]> [...]
> > > > > As previously argued, DUS is an enterprise generating income from
> > > > > commercial sale of goods - a business.
> > > >
> > > > More assertions.
> > >
> > > Assertions?
> > > That DUS i
Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Honestly, you're the first one to bring up that there's some limitation
> on volume regarding being commercial or non-commercial. This still
> doesn't deal with the issue that we claim to not sell products on our
> webpage. Do you happen to know what
Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> * Anthony Towns (aj@azure.humbug.org.au) wrote:
>> AIUI, that's been frowned upon in the US because actually selling
>> things makes you liable for collecting/paying sales tax which is a huge
>> nuisance. Giving stuff away and asking for a donation, mean
Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Scripsit Rich Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>> Actually, depending on what parts of UK law the organisation ended up
>> falling under (and without a clear constitution &c this will probably
>> *not* be what you expect it to be) the membership might be j
Rich Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In the UK, we can construct companies in a number of ways. [...list...]
Additionally, you can be a sole trader, a partnership (usually
with a private agreement between the members), or some more
esoteric ones like a royal charter corporation. Co-operative
o
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Sep 02, 2005 at 06:38:38PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
>
>> > So the society is certainly a
>> > /corporation/, but if it's a business it's a piss-poor one.
>
>> A corporation is a legal person which can own stuff itself and
>> so on. DUS is an unincor
Modesto Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> < Manoj> I have seen debian booths selling stuff at every conference
>> since '97
>>
>> Because policy hasn't matched practice for a very long time. When that's
>> the case, it strongly implies that po
Philip Hands <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd draw a distinction between Debian and it's representatives at Expos and
> the like. [...]
By adding the characters "-UK" or something more distinctive?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [
Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> < Manoj> I have seen debian booths selling stuff at every conference
> since '97
>
> Because policy hasn't matched practice for a very long time. When that's
> the case, it strongly implies that policy is wrong.
That doesn't show that policy
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 07:15:19PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
>> Philip Hands <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > The way we price this stuff has always been based on selling it as cheaply
>> > as possible, while making the numbers round for convenient change at
* MJ Ray ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050907 16:32]:
> Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Well, I don't know how the british rules are, but at least here
> > (Germany) a non-commercial institution can do "business", as long as the
> > "business" helps in reaching the institution's goals. [...]
>
Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 09:11:25AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> * Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>> > Let's say your paroquial association or housewife get-together association,
>> > start to sell house-made cakes in order to finance the repainti
it's resolved for me. I'm surprised if that's
> unacceptable to anyone. There's a shed-load of other stuff that
> would be nice to see, but not enough for me to act on.
The Debian UK Society don't have your details anywhere -- the rules were
written in order to ensure tha
Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, I don't know how the british rules are, but at least here
> (Germany) a non-commercial institution can do "business", as long as the
> "business" helps in reaching the institution's goals. [...]
What is translating as "non-commercial institution" he
On Wed, 7 Sep 2005, Philip Hands wrote:
Is it SPI or a random assortment of Debian folks that attend expos in the US?
Random Debian people. Not even DDs in some cases.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
La Salle Debain - http://www.braincells.com/debian/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [
Merle Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> When it comes to the technical side of things, policy follows practice.
>
> So why flout previous policy? Presumably there's some past
> practice which caused it, even if it's just writing. If you
> really believe
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 09:33:55AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 09:11:25AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > > * Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > > > Let's say your paroquial association or housewife get-together
> > > >
* Stephen Frost ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050907 16:15]:
> In general I believe the practice *has* been that we don't
> sell things.
Actually, I have never seen any Debian booth where we didn't sell
things. With exception of fairs where the fair didn't allow it.
> > It's long been the case that Debia
Stephen Frost wrote:
> If they're doing it on Debian's behalf then they should be following
> Debian's policies, which at least on the website has thusfar been that
> Debian doesn't sell products (or perhaps just doesn't sell CDs). That's
> also been the general understanding that I've had of Deb
Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [...] There are some people for whom
> things will not be resolved in acceptable ways.
When I'm not part of DUS and don't have to allow DUS to hold my
personal details, it's resolved for me. I'm surprised if that's
unacceptable to anyone. There's a she
* Philip Hands ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Stephen Frost wrote:
> > Even so, that was the general policy as I understood it... Should we be
> > saying that we don't sell CDs (do the DUS folks sell CDs? I dunno) only
> > there? Should we be pointing out that we do sell t-shirts somewhere?
>
> I
Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
>>On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 09:11:25AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
>>
>>>* Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
[...]
>>>Uhh...
>>>http://www.debian.org/CD/vendors/info
>>>
>>>"Debian does not sell any products."
>>>
>>>I don't *thi
> > Not relevant and so not worth commenting on. Honestly, I wish these
> > constant attempts to assign blame for this situation would just stop. =20
> > I'm not trying to blame anyone.
>
> When it comes to "I don't follow debian-uk and it certainly doesn'
* Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 09:11:25AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > * Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > > Let's say your paroquial association or housewife get-together
> > > association,
> > > start to sell house-made cakes in order to finance th
* Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 09:11:25AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > * Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > > Nope, if you are really from the US, then your view on this is limited by
> > > the
> > > way you think there, and if not, no idea if you eve
* Anthony Towns (aj@azure.humbug.org.au) wrote:
> AIUI, that's been frowned upon in the US because actually selling
> things makes you liable for collecting/paying sales tax which is a huge
> nuisance. Giving stuff away and asking for a donation, meanwhile, doesn't.
>
> Different countries handle
impact on *others* that might be trying to sell CDs, does it? Not that
> I have a problem with Steve, Phil, and the others either buying or
> selling CDs, but we should consider whether it's appropriate to be
> selling them under the name "Debian UK Society". Maybe it doesn
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 09:11:25AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > Let's say your paroquial association or housewife get-together association,
> > start to sell house-made cakes in order to finance the repainting or fixing
> > of
> > the roof of their chu
t; Not relevant and so not worth commenting on. Honestly, I wish these
> constant attempts to assign blame for this situation would just stop. =20
> I'm not trying to blame anyone.
When it comes to "I don't follow debian-uk and it certainly doesn't
sound like it's actu
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 08:53:54AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > > > And BTW, anyway, does the debian trademark extend to textile and such ?
> > > > Or is
> > > > it only restricted to software products ?
> > >
> > > That's an interesting question and not really very well phrased and so
> > > i
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 09:11:25AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > Nope, if you are really from the US, then your view on this is limited by
> > the
> > way you think there, and if not, no idea if you ever participated in
> > associative life.
>
> Uhh...
* Anthony Towns (aj@azure.humbug.org.au) wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 02:34:25PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > I don't know how real those concerns are, but I know I've heard them.
>
> Man, I love open source FUD.
Yes, I rock. :) Sorry, I didn't look up the other thread I started,
been kin
e
> character assassination and disrespect is disturbing me.
I already pointed out that I thought it was a bad idea and that it needs
to be resolved in another thread... Sorry, I'm not terribly interested
in fighting for it though, you seemed to be doing a fine job of that
yourself and indee
s yet at the *Debian* booth at whichever UK expos DUS goes
> > > to we *are* selling products. It seems pretty likely that the sponsored
> > > booth is in Debian's name, either explicitly or as Debian-UK with the
> > > assumption that Debian-UK is the UK branch of Debi
* Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 08:47:24AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > Perhaps there's a language misunderstanding here. Commercial *means*
> > selling things, at least where I'm from. What you're referring to seems
> > to be what I'd understand as a non-pro
Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I believe there is some animosity due to the opt-out issue but that's
> not what I'm focused on since it's not terribly interesting. [...]
No, not interesting, until something you disagree with is done
in your name without consent. When it's a technical
* Anthony Towns (aj@azure.humbug.org.au) [050907 15:02]:
> AIUI, that's been frowned upon in the US because actually selling
> things makes you liable for collecting/paying sales tax which is a huge
> nuisance. Giving stuff away and asking for a donation, meanwhile, doesn't.
>
> Different countrie
On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 02:34:25PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> I don't know how real those concerns are, but I know I've heard them.
Man, I love open source FUD.
Cheers,
aj
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 10:01:12AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Henning Makholm ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > > Well, there's a BIG similarity:
> > > * both took the debian name for business use without consent;
> > You are pretty much the only one who asserts
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 08:47:24AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Andreas Barth ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > * Stephen Frost ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050907 14:02]:
> > > I'm not so sure I agree with this interpretation... When we claim to
> > > not sell products, and therefore claim to be non-comm
selling products. It seems pretty likely that the sponsored
> > booth is in Debian's name, either explicitly or as Debian-UK with the
> > assumption that Debian-UK is the UK branch of Debian.
>
> I saw products being sold at LinuxTag's debian booth, and saw no major proble
* Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 08:03:03AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > I'm not so sure I agree with this interpretation... When we claim to
> > not sell products, and therefore claim to be non-commercial, I'd have to
> > say that I'd expect anything which doe
* Andreas Barth ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> * Stephen Frost ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050907 14:02]:
> > I'm not so sure I agree with this interpretation... When we claim to
> > not sell products, and therefore claim to be non-commercial, I'd have to
> > say that I'd expect anything which does sell pr
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 08:03:03AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 12:30:39AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> > > The debian trademark policy says no businesses get to use
> > > the mark. Why should this selling association, which ignores
>
ign blame for this situation would just stop.
I'm not trying to blame anyone.
> > Personally, I think Debian/SPI should be
> > selling things but I respect that the apparent majority disagrees with
> > me on that. Certainly if Debian/SPI isn't going to do it then
>
booth is in Debian's name, either explicitly or as Debian-UK with the
> assumption that Debian-UK is the UK branch of Debian.
I saw products being sold at LinuxTag's debian booth, and saw no major problem
with that.
> > .From my overview of this discussion, it is just a petty
* Stephen Frost ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050907 14:02]:
> * Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 12:30:39AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> > > The debian trademark policy says no businesses get to use
> > > the mark. Why should this selling association, which ignores
> > > good p
* Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 12:30:39AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> > The debian trademark policy says no businesses get to use
> > the mark. Why should this selling association, which ignores
> > good practice, get a swift exception, while Ian Murdock's
> > develo
ommercial
> distributions.
I do believe there are non-profits out there which do exactly this.
This issue is about doing it using Debian's name (the trademark issue)
and attempting to appear as part of Debian (the non-commercial issue).
If DUS/Debian-UK is really the UK branch of Debian then i
On Fri, Sep 02, 2005 at 06:38:38PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> > and it does not engage in any lucrative activities of
> > which the society itself is a benefactor, seeing that revenue from CD
> > sales is donated to Debian.
> DUS spends on itself, which is necessary in its current setup.
> >From the
ress an interest in membership in order to be considered
a member. I'll start a thread to that effect back on the debian-uk list.
Cheers, Phil.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Scripsit MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > You moved slickly from membership to whether one has a vote.
>
> That's the only thing membership *means* when there are no dues to pay.
Being part of an unincorporated association has other implications.
Debatin
> As previously argued, DUS is an enterprise generating income from
> > > > commercial sale of goods - a business.
> > >
> > > More assertions.
> >
> > Assertions?
> > That DUS is an enterprise?
>
> What exactly is this DUS thingy you are all spe
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 09:38:35AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > [...] in my vocabulary "not-for-profit business" is an oxymoron?
>
> OK. So, for example, http://www.createuk.com/ isn't a business to you?
"CREATE is a charity and social business based in S
Scripsit MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Is DUS's involuntary membership even legal? I don't know.
>> Which law would prevent them from giving you a vote in their matters?
>> How would you enforce such a law? [...]
> You moved slickly from membership
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [...] in my vocabulary "not-for-profit business" is an oxymoron?
OK. So, for example, http://www.createuk.com/ isn't a business to you?
If not, I think your definition is a bit unusual.
Best wishes,
--
MJ Ray (slef), K. Lynn, England, email see http://
Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And BTW, anyway, does the debian trademark extend to textile and such ? Or is
> it only restricted to software products ?
I don't think it does, which may be the reason for the non-free
logo. DUS (the _D_ebian _U_K _S_ociety... debian-uk
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 12:30:11AM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > Businesses are not inherently evil but they do have different priorities
> > than Debian. I don't follow debian-uk and it certainly doesn't sound
> > like it's actually been resolved in an a
- a business.
> >
> > More assertions.
>
> Assertions?
> That DUS is an enterprise?
What exactly is this DUS thingy you are all speaking about ? Is it the same as
Debian-UK under another name, or something else ?
If you insist on spamming the whole world with this, at least provid
guess any court would take the reasonable approach over
> > the opt-out thingy, and not make those co-opted members liable, but IANAL).
>
> First, I'd rather not take that risk in this climate.
Any juridicial system, where you get assigned responsability like that without
attendin
On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 07:15:19PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> Philip Hands <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The way we price this stuff has always been based on selling it as cheaply
> > as possible, while making the numbers round for convenient change at Expos,
> > and aiming to do just better than brea
Scripsit Rich Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Actually, depending on what parts of UK law the organisation ended up
> falling under (and without a clear constitution &c this will probably
> *not* be what you expect it to be) the membership might be jointly and
> severally liable for the actions of th
Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Scripsit MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [...]
> > As previously argued, DUS is an enterprise generating income from
> > commercial sale of goods - a business.
>
> More assertions.
Assertions?
That DUS is an enterprise?
That DUS generates income from commer
o the absolute best of my
> knowledge) he's the only UK-based developer to have raised any serious
> objection to the way things have been handled so far.
And look how I'm treated! That's a fairly powerful way to shut
many people up or, even if they care, make them bet on other
and not make those co-opted members liable, but IANAL).
First, I'd rather not take that risk in this climate.
Second, what would happen to Debian's money if "Debian UK"'s
constitution is found not to stand up in court? What'd happen
to debian's reputation? We
Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1) Holding money in the UK on behalf of Debian
> 2) Selling t-shirts and whatnot
> 3) The name issue with 'Debian-UK'
> 4) The 'opt-out' membership
> 5) The beer-bashes
> 6) The bank account
>
> For my
almost certainly
> > > will help Debian in the end as it's been shown that not having a clear
> > > trademark policy certainly hurts Debian.
> >
> > No, you are wrong, this is a stupid flamewar over inter-personal dislikes or
> > whatever of some UK gu
* Henning Makholm ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Scripsit Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> >> It seems that you are under the impression that the activities such as the
> >> selling of T-shirts are done for the purpose of raising money. (Not
> >> surprising given the spin that MJ Ray's been pu
> > trademark policy certainly hurts Debian.
>
> No, you are wrong, this is a stupid flamewar over inter-personal dislikes or
> whatever of some UK guys, who have a misunderstanding about the debian-uk
> association, as happens in lot of associations i guess, and this is very ver
nds me of the belief Universities have that their use of
material covered by the patents of others doesn't matter, because
University research is "non-commercial". Of course, since Madey vs Duke,
in the US there is precedent that research at Universities *is*
commercial, since (amon
Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Scripsit MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
>> Yes, I've a personal axe, but it's based on this real event:
>> I was told I had been made a member of a new UK unincorporated
>> association based on db.d.o d
pid flamewar over inter-personal dislikes or
whatever of some UK guys, who have a misunderstanding about the debian-uk
association, as happens in lot of associations i guess, and this is very very
quickly gettting over anoying, so all UK-guys concerned, please stop being
stuborn and prideful and w
Scripsit Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> It seems that you are under the impression that the activities such as the
>> selling of T-shirts are done for the purpose of raising money. (Not
>> surprising given the spin that MJ Ray's been putting on it)
> It doesn't actually make any difference
Scripsit MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> You are pretty much the only one who asserts that Debian UK has
>> anything at all to do with "business". Despite being asked for
>> clarification several times, you h
t.
I would certainly appriciate an organization of appropriate kind in the
UK to handle Debian/SPI funds. That organization should be accountable
to the DPL and Debian, should provide periodic accounting reports, and
should only recieve/spend money as appropriate for Debian. Currently,
unfortuna
Philip Hands <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The way we price this stuff has always been based on selling it as cheaply
> as possible, while making the numbers round for convenient change at Expos,
> and aiming to do just better than break-even [...]
How can anyone define a not-for-profit business if
whatnot
> 3) The name issue with 'Debian-UK'
> 4) The 'opt-out' membership
> 5) The beer-bashes
> 6) The bank account [...]
1, 3 and 6 can go together IMO. 4 should never happen for debian.
2 and 3 should not go together unless all businesses can use the name
(perhaps
Steve McIntyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [...] Precisely what personal details do
> you think D-UK holds about you, either correct or incorrect?
How is DUS recording its membership? I can't think of a way
for it to do so without either dumping data from db.d.o (are
businesses allowed to do that
1 - 100 of 137 matches
Mail list logo
