Project Governance, take 2

[Ian Monroe]

On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 6:47 AM, Jeff Mitchell <kde-dev at emailgoeshere.com> wrote:
> Nikolaj Hald Nielsen wrote:
>> I cant help but think that we should really look into how to set up an
>> appropriate "not for profit" legal entity to shield individuals from
>> ending up in any form of problems with the tax authorities. The money
>> we collect from this years roktober is one thing, but potentially, if
>> Amarok 2 becomes popular on MAc and Windows, the commission we get
>> from Magnatune ( or any other such deals we make) could become quite
>> significant.
>>
>> Or if this is too much of a hassle, take another look at the Software
>> Conservancy ( I think that was the name of it ).
>
> On behalf of the KDE Marketing Working Group, I had looked into the
> Software Freedom Conservancy in the past, since there were thoughts that
> having a U.S.-based non-profit entity would make it easier to collection
> donations from U.S.-based corporations (among other things).  They might
> be useful, but the last thing I heard from them was that they would
> discuss the proposal at the next board meeting, which was slated for June.
>
> IIRC, I believe the idea was that sub-projects/related projects (which
> were generally defined as, projects that have their home in KDE's SCM
> system) would, if they so decided, be able to opt-in.  This would allow
> them to enjoy the benefits they choose without worrying too much about
> governance and legal issues, and without having to have every project
> set something up with the SFC.
>
> I'll get back to you guys on this -- I'm going to check to see if the
> MWG is still interested in this situation in the first place.

Even in this situation we still need a framework to make budget
decisions. The way the SFC works (I meet one of their lawyers at the
Linux Foundation Summit) is that you tell them how to spend your money
and then they do. We'd need a non-haphazard way to speak with one
voice.

Ian