Alex Hudson home@alexhudson.com wrote:
If there is no copyright, the GPL becomes completely ineffectual, AFAIK. The whole GPL system is based on copyright. The idea is, you've giving freedoms to people, but restricting/ensuring the freedoms that they pass on. For you to be able to do such a thing, you need a legal mechanism to impose your will - something that they cannot get out of (unless they don't use the software ;). Copyright provides such a mechanism: it allows the GPL to say "This is the property of the author. To be allowed to use this, you must follow this code of conduct". If there is no mechanism, the GPL is unenforceable..
My point exactly. Maybe I should have posed my original question differently. let me rephrase:
Is there an exact equivalent to the us-american "copyright" in each of the countries of Europe (side-note: what "europe" are we talking about? Only the countries of the EU or the "physical" Europe?)? If there is no exact equivalent, what is the closest thing and does it guarantee that the GPL holds and is enforcable? If there is no equivalent, and things are in general rather different (law-wise), does the GPL hold? Would it need to be rephrased?
I may sound paranoid here, but I could imagine companies using free code to produce closed-source software, _if they can_, meaning if there are loopholes in the GPL that don't hold for <insert your country here>-law.
Cheers,
-Jan
I think we should be talking about Europe in a geographical sense.
First of all I think that puting the '=' sign between EU and Europe until all European (geographically speaking) countries are inside (and that, as I see it, is far from now).
Second, it would be just as important to be a part of the FSFE in transitioning countries, as it is in the EU.
Adn third, why we should bne talking about Europe in geo. sense, is that, at least up to now, Sladjan and my little self have understood it that way, and it would be very unfair of you guys to be eucentric enough not to include hr or yu, or whatever other non-EU country the right to be a part of the FSFE.
Of course I might have missed the point completly, but I think this is useful as a part of making things clean, tidy and defined. (elegant even)
Sinisa -- "Mors EULAe, libertas softwarei!"
Dear Sinisa,
I think you can sure, that no one of the starting group thought of limiting the activities to the menber countries of the EU. An different thing is, to check out the legal conditions first in that "area", because in the future they might give some sort of orientation to the other countries: Though the information you gave about M$-behavior in your country sound ugly, it seems to me, that Free Software has a special chance there: a lot of infrastructural things there to me seem to have still open possibilities, while here "in the west" the M$-indoctrination works since the beginning. And the arguments of security and minimal prices may be convincing to a lot of people. So, activities of the FSF-Europe are very important especially outside the EU.
To all the others in the list - and especially Georg:
Wouldn't be the organizational form of an association like Amnesty iInternational a good example for the FSF-Europe? The legal form of a "foundation" in the strict sense (as far as I know about it in Germany) may not be the best solution, I think. Some sort of "eingetragener Verein" ("registered association") could be better.
Bernd
At 00:07 29.11.00 +0100, Sinisa "Sigma14" "187.64.230.77" Milicic wrote:
I think we should be talking about Europe in a geographical sense.
First of all I think that puting the '=' sign between EU and Europe until all European (geographically speaking) countries are inside (and that, as I see it, is far from now).
Second, it would be just as important to be a part of the FSFE in transitioning countries, as it is in the EU.
Adn third, why we should bne talking about Europe in geo. sense, is that, at least up to now, Sladjan and my little self have understood it that way, and it would be very unfair of you guys to be eucentric enough not to include hr or yu, or whatever other non-EU country the right to be a part of the FSFE.
Of course I might have missed the point completly, but I think this is useful as a part of making things clean, tidy and defined. (elegant even)
Sinisa
"Mors EULAe, libertas softwarei!"
Discussion mailing list Discussion@fsfeurope.org http://mailman.fsfeurope.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discussion
I think you can sure, that no one of the starting group thought of
limiting
the activities to the menber countries of the EU. An different thing is,
to
check out the legal conditions first in that "area", because in the future they might give some sort of orientation to the other countries:
I think, in any case, it's not something to be too worried about (boundaries, that is). Let's say, for example, that to make things nice and easy from a legal point of view we limit ourselves only to the countries of the EU (please note: I'm not advocating that at all, it's just hypothetical :)). Does that stop us from doing good work in the neighbouring countries also? Not really.. for example, we can still distribute information, help out groups on the ground, give advice, etc. Given any boundary, would that stop us from going (for example) to a computer show in America to spread awareness of FSFE? No, not really. The real question of boundary is something to do with 'areas of responsibility' in a way: we're trying to make sure as much of the world has a FSF of some sort as possible ;)) Well, the US is already taken care of. And although, as FSFE, our 'area of responsibility' might be the union of the EU and geographical Europe, even that doesn't stop us helping other countries/areas if needs be. If a group in country A (A not being in Europe, as we define it) asks for our help, for example, then maybe the question should be, "Are we the FSF in best position to help?"
To all the others in the list - and especially Georg:
Wouldn't be the organizational form of an association like Amnesty iInternational a good example for the FSF-Europe? The legal form of a "foundation" in the strict sense (as far as I know about it in Germany)
may
not be the best solution, I think. Some sort of "eingetragener Verein" ("registered association") could be better.
I think the idea would be to draw up "what the FSFE is", and then in each country get as close to that ideal as possible. For example, in the UK we have Registered Charities, for example, which incur tax breaks, among other things, and aren't limited to "good causes" in the traditional sense (helping the homeless, elderly, etc.) - they can be set up by anyone for a non-profit interest, pretty much. So, in the UK, a Registered Charity might be the best solution. In other countries, it could be that setting up a private company is the best answer - we want to be able to do the maximum amount of good possible, and if in one country being a private company means you enjoy tax breaks, or other such incentives, then maybe that is the answer. But, it would definitely help to have some idea of what we are aiming at. For example, we should be able to say "FSFE will be non profit making", rather than saying "FSFE should be set up as [structure X]". The end, and the means to the end, should be separate ;))
Cheers,
Alex.
non-profit interest, pretty much. So, in the UK, a Registered Charity might be the best solution. In other countries, it could be that setting up a private company is the best answer - we want to be able to do the maximum
I think in the UK it would be best to set up a corporate charity. This involves setting up a Limited Company (very easy, I have set up 3 before, one being a charity). I can print up a Memorandum and Articles of Association in about 1 minute, and with a £5 "solicitor to sign the form", the forms from companies house and a £20 cheque, the company part is set up (total cost £25).
I have the forms somewhere in my filing cabinet to set up a charity. I was intending to set up a "free design" or environmental charity one of these days, but I could use the forms for FSFE.
Jeff Davies
non-profit interest, pretty much. So, in the UK, a Registered Charity
might
be the best solution. In other countries, it could be that setting up a private company is the best answer - we want to be able to do the
maximum
I think in the UK it would be best to set up a corporate charity. This involves setting up a Limited Company (very easy, I have set up 3 before, one being a charity). I can print up a Memorandum and Articles of Association in about 1 minute, and with a £5 "solicitor to sign the form", the forms from companies house and a £20 cheque, the company part is set up (total cost £25).
I think you're making my point exactly ;) We could argue forever on the exact legal form such organisations might take, they're going to be different in every country, and it's probably not going to be obvious until we have a set of "characteristics" we want the organisation to have. Obviously, people with experience in these matters (such as yourself) have a vital role to play in every country opening our eyes to all the different possibilities, but we definitely need to agree on basic 'features' each organisation ought to have, and then find an organisational structure that best fits our need in each country ;)
Cheers,
Alex.
Alex Hudson skrev:
I think you're making my point exactly ;) We could argue forever on the exact legal form such organisations might take, they're going to be different in every country, and it's probably not going to be obvious until we have a set of "characteristics" we want the organisation to have. Obviously, people with experience in these matters (such as yourself) have a vital role to play in every country opening our eyes to all the different possibilities, but we definitely need to agree on basic 'features' each organisation ought to have, and then find an organisational structure that best fits our need in each country ;)
Correct, what is needed is a base charter that can be used as a starting point when starting the organisation in a different country so that all organizations in all countries have the same basic rules.
Doesn´t FSF have something like that that can be used as a starting point.
Of cource that charter cant be too specific since we probably end up with different organisational forms in different countries but it whould mention the minimal requirements for that a country organization should uphold to be able to qualify for to be part of a greater organization.
In Sweden the best is probably a simple non-profit organization which can be created for a registration fee of 750 SEK (about $75).
Anders "using gnu software since mid-80" Lindbäck