On Tue, Oct 21, 2003 at 11:40:46PM -0700, Benj. Mako Hill wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 12, 2003 at 04:07:51PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 11, 2003 at 10:58:30PM +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> > > > Charitable organisations have to fulfill a particular set of rules; like
> > > > being educ
On Tue, Oct 14, 2003 at 09:11:31PM +1000, Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project
Leader wrote:
> > Certainly it'd be reasonable to restrict "Debian Labs" to groups
> > that are doing R&D rather than sales. Do you want to limit
> > consulting work too though?
> Well, if we don't, then any Debian consult
Sorry to be replying to this so late but the part of this thread that
is living on drew me back into this where I realized I had not
answered.
On Sun, Sep 21, 2003 at 05:21:34PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> >I am curious about why? You state you don't want to see it, but
> >don't give any supporting ar
On Sun, Oct 12, 2003 at 04:07:51PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 11, 2003 at 10:58:30PM +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> > > Charitable organisations have to fulfill a particular set of rules; like
> > > being educational, helping the homeless, that sort of thing.
> > True, but generall
On Sat, Sep 20, 2003 at 03:43:18PM -0700, Derek Neighbors wrote:
> Is the only currently discussed benefit use of the "Debian"
> trademark? If so, do you want to consider other benefits? Some
> thoughts that come to mind would be allowing them some greater say
> in project issues. However, perso
On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 05:15:30PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 05, 2003 at 03:47:15PM +1000, Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project
> Leader wrote:
> > * Anthony Towns [2003-09-20 17:07]:
> >
> > > By contrast, I wouldn't have a problem in principle with, eg, "HP
> > > Debian Labs".
> >
On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 04:58:22PM +, Dylan Thurston wrote:
> IANAL, but I believe that according to US law there are limits on who
> non-profits can give money to: if the lab is not a non-profit
> corporation, SPI could not (in my understanding) give money to the
> lab. OTOH, SPI could surely
* Anthony Towns [2003-10-09 17:15]:
> I suspect that HP shareholders think that they're using HP research labs
> to make a profit.
Sure, but they don't make a profit *directly*. They're not selling
any stuff, they just do R&D. Other parts of HP sell what they've
developed.
> Certainly it'd be
> By contrast, I wouldn't have a problem in principle
> with, eg, "HP Debian Labs".
Hello, everyone,
I would like to suggest that names tell what the thing they are naming is.
If something is Debian, then it is OK to call it 'Debian'
if it is not, then it is not.
This would have advantage t
On Sat, Oct 11, 2003 at 10:58:30PM +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> > Charitable organisations have to fulfill a particular set of rules; like
> > being educational, helping the homeless, that sort of thing.
> True, but generally that list isn't exclusive --
AIUI, in .au the purposes have to cove
On 2003-10-11 21:58:30 +0100 Matthias Urlichs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Disclaimer: Again, that's the approximate situation in Germany.
The situation is probably similar in most EU states by now. In
England and Wales (and probably rest of UK), "benefit of the
community" or "benecom" is a su
Hi, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Charitable organisations have to fulfill a particular set of rules; like
> being educational, helping the homeless, that sort of thing.
True, but generally that list isn't exclusive -- you just have to work
harder convincing the tax people that your activity merits tax-
On Fri, Oct 10, 2003 at 10:05:57PM +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> Hi, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > .au law is that you can't make donations for work on Debian
> > tax deductible.
> Why not?
Charitable organisations have to fulfill a particular set of rules;
like being educational, helping the homele
Hi, Anthony Towns wrote:
> .au law is that you can't make donations for work on Debian
> tax deductible.
Why not?
In Germany, the way this works is that an organization sets up a list of
goals, and if these fall into some categories which define tax-exempt
status, the state grants that status to
On 2003-10-10, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 04:58:22PM +, Dylan Thurston wrote:
>> On 2003-10-09, Anthony Towns wrote:
>> > Even stuff packaged in non-free? How about stuff they maintain in
>> > non-free?
>> non-free is not part of Debian.
>
> Mmm, slogans. Given that...
>
>
On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 04:58:22PM +, Dylan Thurston wrote:
> On 2003-10-09, Anthony Towns wrote:
> >> > non-free on such machines? Unpackaged stuff? Stuff packaged locally? LSB
> >> > stuff? Proprietary stuff like win4lin or CrossoverOffice?
> >> non-free/proprietary stuff, better not. =20
>
On 2003-10-09, Anthony Towns wrote:
>> > non-free on such machines? Unpackaged stuff? Stuff packaged locally? LSB
>> > stuff? Proprietary stuff like win4lin or CrossoverOffice?
>> non-free/proprietary stuff, better not. =20
>
> Even stuff packaged in non-free? How about stuff they maintain in
> no
On Sun, Oct 05, 2003 at 03:47:15PM +1000, Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project
Leader wrote:
> * Anthony Towns [2003-09-20 17:07]:
> > By contrast, I wouldn't have a problem in principle with, eg, "HP
> > Debian Labs".
> I'd also have no problems with this. However, I also think that the
> Debian L
* Anthony Towns [2003-09-20 17:07]:
> By contrast, I wouldn't have a problem in principle with, eg, "HP
> Debian Labs".
I'd also have no problems with this. However, I also think that the
Debian Labs should not be used to make a profit. I think a HP Debian
Labs should be of a similar nature as
On 2003-09-20 23:34:03 +0100 Derek Neighbors <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Benj. Mako Hill wrote:
| not want to see commercial entities calling themselves
Debian-anything
What are "commercial entities"? As far as I can tell, nearly all DDs
engage in some forms of commerce.
I am curious about
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Anthony Towns wrote:
| then we should act). But we're meant to be supporting our users, and not
| discriminating against them, so forbidding commercial entities outright
| from being involved just doesn't seem like a good first step.
|
| Hope that mad
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Benj. Mako Hill wrote:
| You weren't explicit about the non-profit aspect in the message in any
| sort of categorical way but I want to step forward and say that I do
| not want to see commercial entities calling themselves Debian-anything
I am curio
On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 11:19:52PM -0700, Benj. Mako Hill wrote:
> You weren't explicit about the non-profit aspect in the message in any
> sort of categorical way but I want to step forward and say that I do
> not want to see commercial entities calling themselves Debian-anything
> and am not sure
Martin, I want to applaud you for a taking the time to think through
this as much as you have. I think this is an elegant way to draw a
distinct line between Debian the project and non-profit work on Debian
while still letting charitable organizations be able to bear the
Debian name.
You weren't e
On Tue, Sep 16, 2003 at 07:44:59PM +0200, Roland Mas wrote:
> Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project Leader, 2003-09-16 17:20:18 +0200 :
> [...]
> > I would like to ask for comments on this idea. Are people comfortable
> > with organizations calling themselves " Debian Labs" assuming
> > that they are
On Wed, Sep 17, 2003 at 07:25:37AM -0700, Derek Neighbors wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> I think great caution should be exercised here. One thing Debian
> appears to take very seriously is it's social contract and the
> evaluation of the licenses of the packages it
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I am not a Debian developer so probably have no right to interject
opinion here, but that have never stopped me in the past. ;)
Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project Leader wrote:
| They are currently in the process of setting up a non-profit
| foundatio
* Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project Leader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [030916 17:16]:
> I would like to ask for comments on this idea. Are people comfortable
> with organizations calling themselves " Debian Labs" assuming
> that they are doing Debian related work and generally conform to a set
> of guid
Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> What I suggest is that certain organizations should be allowed to use
> the name "Debian Labs" in their name. Hence, Skolelinux could create
> its foundation with the name "Skolelinux Debian Labs" [4].
Sounds good to me.
- Jim Van Zandt
Hi,
Roland Mas wrote:
> I myself am not quite sure I'd like such a
> prominent place for the word "Debian" (but I haven't thought really
> deeply about that yet).
Neither have I, much, but I _do_ like the prominence of "Debian".
IMHO the name " Debian Labs", with a footnote that Debian is
a trad
Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project Leader, 2003-09-16 17:20:18 +0200 :
[...]
> I would like to ask for comments on this idea. Are people comfortable
> with organizations calling themselves " Debian Labs" assuming
> that they are doing Debian related work and generally conform to a set
> of guidelin
Le Wed, Sep 17, 2003 at 01:16:28AM +1000, Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project
Leader écrivait:
> an idea which I think offers a good balance. What I suggest is that
> certain organizations should be allowed to use the name "Debian Labs"
> in their name. Hence, Skolelinux could create its foundatio
The Skolelinux folks are working on a Debian based distribution for
schools. The project started in Norway, but people in other countries
got interested and have become involved in the project as well.
Everything Skolelinux does is being integrated into Debian, they are
working especially hard on
33 matches
Mail list logo
