On Fri February 19 2021 17:13:02 Slávek Banko via tde-users wrote: > On Friday 19 of February 2021 18:13:04 Mike Bird via tde-users wrote: > > 0. "Legislation" in English refers to laws enacted e.g. by the EU or > > national, regional, or local governments. I think what you're > > talking about is a legal entity such as a partnership, association, > > club, society, or nonprofit corporation. > > What I mentioned as option 3. I assumed some form of non-profit > organization. In this option 0. you mean something different than I > thought in option 3.? Maybe I shouldn't have numbered it at all instead of using 0. I was trying to explain that you had been using the word "legislation" but "legislation" doesn't mean a legal entity such as a nonprofit, "legislation" means laws. This "section 0" is not intended to offer another option. Like "section X" on liability it is a related issue but not another option. > > > 1. Fiscal host ... e.g. OpenCollective. > > Yes, here I was a little inaccurate in the description - OpenCollective is > a platform and Open Source Collective (for the US) and Open Collective > Europe (for the EU) are the fiscal hosts I had in mind when I mentioned > the choice between the US and the EU. As I mentioned, these fiscal hosts > only provide fund management and legal status in terms of tax returns. Quoting from their web site: "Your collective remains an unincorporated partnership. That means that you cannot use the Open Collective Europe ASBL non profit as the point of contact, billing address or legal entity responsible for your activities" This would appear to preclude using them for tax returns. The taxable entity would, it seems to me, be the unincorporated partnership, or the members thereof. > > > 2a. A company that focuses on providing legal status - sfconservancy > > In this regard, I hoped that if SF Conservancy agreed to become a > membership project and take us under its roof, these legal issues would be > on SF Conservancy's shoulders. This is exactly what I saw as an advantage > over a simple fiscal host as well as over when we would have our own small > organization without the background of lawyers. At SF Conservancy, I > expect lawyers who have experience with this, and that this is their > important advantage. The question you have to ask is why would SFC spend millions of dollars defending TDE? Linux, yes. Their donors have a vested interest in Linux and similar high profile projects. But their likely income from TDE wouldn't cover the cost of an attorney writing a letter - I've paid $730 for a simple half page letter - let alone litigating a case that could cost millions. > > > 3. Our own non-profit organization. > > For our own small organization, we would have to deal with filing tax > returns as well as monitoring possible changes in legislation. This can be > easy or it may require hiring an accountant and possibly a lawyer. At the > same time, we would have to verify whether the members of such an > organization can come from countries other than the one in which the > organization will be formed, or whether there is a condition to reside in > that state. In any case, it would not provide a protective roof, as it > could be from the SF Conservancy. Non-profits are not a big deal. There are probably thousands of them if you live in a big city. Everything from sports groups to model railroad clubs to amateur opera. You don't need an accountant or a lawyer unless you have employees or huge sums of money. Bookkeeping isn't much more than balancing a check book. You're not selling stuff so you don't even need Quickbooks or GnuCash. Quicken or KMyMoney is more than enough. > > X. Liability > > We provide TDE under the GNU GPL license, where the disclaimer is part of > this license (points 11 and 12). As Chris mentioned and suggested by > Philippe, this disclaimer could be added to the first card in the > KPersonalizer. That seems like a good idea to me. The disclaimer is the first line of defense but it only disclaims warranty and only to the extent permitted by law. Even here in the US such a disclaimer does not protect against implied warranties. Consumer protections are stronger in the EU so warranty disclaimers give TDE less protection. If some large corporation sues TDE and claims that you deliberately or negligently harmed them pretty much your only practical defense is to give them your non-profit and all its assets and try to get the court to protect you and your assets. Nobody is going to donate a few million dollars for a legal defense fund unless you're as important and famous as Linux or Gnu. If you're not incorporated there is no defense. You may or may not have a house and car and savings now but you probably will have in the future and your significant other may not be pleased if they all disappear one day because some corporation decided to sue TDE. As it happens although my hobbies all involve nonprofit corporations my business does not. It is a sole proprietorship. However I carefully control who I sell my services to and none of them are likely to sue me. You have no control over who installs TDE. Royal Dutch Shell could install TDE, KMail could lose an email, Shell could lose millions, and they could come after you and the other developers personally unless you are incorporated. I am not a lawyer (although I've won issues on appeal in propria persona). I am not your lawyer. I am not TDE's lawyer. Nothing here is legal advice. My only advice to you is to consult a CZ lawyer - or trustworthy book - not to set up your nonprofit corporation but to help you decide whether you need one. ____________________________________________________ tde-users mailing list -- users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Web mail archive available at https://mail.trinitydesktop.org/mailman3/hyperkitty/list/users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
