summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
blob: ace23bfb35fdcaa2753712f93ab26a389cf5cc83 (plain)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
18:17  * NeddySeagoon bangs the gavel to open the meeting
18:17 <@NeddySeagoon> Roll call
18:17  * NeddySeagoon is here
18:17 <@dabbott> here
18:17  * quantumsummers_ is present
18:18 <@rich0> here with five bars :)
18:18  * quantumsummers_ pokes robbat2
18:19 <@NeddySeagoon> I'm logging
18:20 <@NeddySeagoon> Ok, we have quorum, lets go.  robbat2 will catch up
18:20 <@NeddySeagoon> quantumsummers its all yours.  Item 3 old business
18:20 <@quantumsummers_> ok
18:21 <@quantumsummers_> I had mentioned previously the general cost of CPA assistance as well as the filing fee
18:21 <@robbat2> sorry few mins delay, real life, still afk
18:21 <@quantumsummers_> np, robbat2
18:22 <@quantumsummers_> I have made it fairly far into the finances, still working on this years stuff, but its not technically finished (the fiscal year)
18:22 <@quantumsummers_> sent the paypal thing to you guys for some reference
18:22 <@quantumsummers_> sooo, I have a few things to propose
18:23 <@quantumsummers_> 1. Based on the general costs of CPA assistance coming all within the same range, I propose we engage KPM for our CPA <- Motion. Can I get a second?
18:24 <@NeddySeagoon> Seconded
18:24 <@quantumsummers_> Please call the vote Mr. NeddySeagoon
18:24 <@NeddySeagoon> quantumsummers, is that the CPA you normaly work with ?
18:24 <@NeddySeagoon> Vote for  KPM for our CPA 
18:24 <@quantumsummers_> for reference I use this CPA for both my personal and all business activities ( 3 business)
18:24 <@NeddySeagoon> Aye
18:24 <@quantumsummers_> aye
18:24 <@rich0> aye
18:25 <@dabbott> yes
18:25 <@NeddySeagoon> Motion carried
18:25 <@NeddySeagoon> quantumsummers, what contract term ?
18:25 <@quantumsummers_> its a project rate essentially
18:25 <@quantumsummers_> which works in our favor I belive
18:26 <@NeddySeagoon> ok.  Not a fixed time period
18:26 <@dabbott> quantumsummers, this is them correct http://www.kpmcpa.com/
18:26 <@quantumsummers_> pay per filing, not a fixed time
18:26 <@quantumsummers_> dabbott yes
18:26 <@quantumsummers_> I have been working with them for 5 year now
18:26 <@NeddySeagoon> quantumsummers, do they want a link on the foundation page ?
18:26 <@quantumsummers_> their rates were comparable or lower than others
18:26 <@quantumsummers_> NeddySeagoon: they did not request anything like that
18:27 <@NeddySeagoon> Should we offer ?   In the spirit of openness we should post who we employ
18:27 <@robbat2> back
18:27 <@quantumsummers_> NeddySeagoon: I can see if they are interested, sure.
18:28 <@NeddySeagoon> Please continue
18:28 <@quantumsummers_> in any event, I doubt they will mind if we post we are contracting with them
18:28 <@robbat2> aye for KPM as CPA from me
18:29 <@quantumsummers_> 2. I propose we file as a corporation in the state of Missouri. Reasons as follows; I can more easily manage finances with a local bank account. It will let us use my office and PO Box (free of charge) as legal "headquarters", and since there is no one in NM we could at some point wind that down. <- Motion.
18:30 <@quantumsummers_> this should make things somewhat easier, and we can get mail
18:30 <@NeddySeagoon> quantumsummers, is this as well as or instead of NM
18:30 <@rich0> clarify - we will incorporate in both?
18:30 <@quantumsummers_> the NM entity will remain in existence until it is obsolete
18:31 <@NeddySeagoon> quantumsummers, do you propose to continue as treasurer ?
18:31 <@quantumsummers_> rich0: we are incorporated in NM, the motion is to file for incorporation in MO additionally
18:31 <@quantumsummers_> NeddySeagoon: I think that is a good idea at this point
18:31 <@quantumsummers_> perhaps I should transition from Secretary
18:31 <@robbat2> what tax implications does it have?
18:31 <@rich0> fine as long as it doesnt add a great paperwork burden
18:31 <@NeddySeagoon> quantumsummers, I'm worred about both the workload and the 'bus factor'  ...
18:31 <@quantumsummers_> simple filing for MO
18:32 <@quantumsummers_> robbat2: ^ both to incorporate and file taxes
18:32 <@rich0> nm doent seem bad - most of the issue is federal
18:32 <@NeddySeagoon> quantumsummers_, does this mean we have to do annual filings in both states ?
18:32 <@quantumsummers_> that is correct, however it will make it easier to have an official location where a trustee lives
18:33 <@quantumsummers_> NeddySeagoon: yes, but its a single page deal, very simple
18:33 <@NeddySeagoon> quantumsummers, ok.
18:33 <@rich0> seems to me that if we get the irs under control the states just follow, but nokt familiar with mi
18:33 <@quantumsummers_> main reason is banking, impo
18:33 <@quantumsummers_> Missouri is a favorable state to non-profit corporations
18:33 <@NeddySeagoon> Seconded  than we incorporate in Mo as well as NM
18:34 <@rich0> ok, aye from me
18:34 <@quantumsummers_> its like filing to do official business in the state
18:34 <@robbat2> aye from me
18:34 <@quantumsummers_> which has beneficial side effect of making banking much easier.
18:34 <@dabbott> aye from me also
18:34 <@quantumsummers_> aye
18:34 <@NeddySeagoon> quantumsummers, I would really like to see you divest yourself of one of yur officer roles to make the Foundation more robust
18:34 <@NeddySeagoon> aye
18:34 <@quantumsummers_> NeddySeagoon: I would like that too
18:35 <@NeddySeagoon> Motion carried
18:35 <@quantumsummers_> thanks
18:35 <@quantumsummers_> #3
18:35 <@NeddySeagoon> quantumsummers, lets repost the ad you responded to
18:35 <@NeddySeagoon> see if we can't get an 'outdider'
18:35 <@quantumsummers_> NeddySeagoon: ok.
18:35 <@NeddySeagoon> outsider
18:36 <@quantumsummers_> I think the secretary role should go to someone in the US, since its a signatory role
18:36 <@quantumsummers_> rather important
18:36 <@NeddySeagoon> quantumsummers, agreed
18:36 <@NeddySeagoon> quantumsummers, you have some more
18:36 <@quantumsummers_> though we should solicit for an assistant secretary
18:37 <@quantumsummers_> maybe dabbott or rich0 want the Secretary job?
18:37 <@NeddySeagoon> sure.  If we get two applicants we can appoint them both
18:37 <@quantumsummers_> I will still support my membership webapp, although I hope to deprecate it with the GSoC work this summer
18:37 <@quantumsummers_> NeddySeagoon: sounds good
18:37 <@rich0> do noot mind, but let me review. not a bad idea to post it.
18:37 <@NeddySeagoon> I would like to get a Gentoo outsider if we can - split the officer / trustee relaionship
18:38 <@quantumsummers_> NeddySeagoon: we just need to be careful, that is all.
18:38 <@quantumsummers_> ok great, so #3
18:38 <@NeddySeagoon> quantumsummers, understood
18:39 <@rich0> NeddySeagoon: agree outsider would be good
18:39 <@quantumsummers_> In the case that in working through with the CPA, there may be some potential we need to engage an attorney that specializes in taxes. I do not have one in mind at this time (although I work with a few locally that have that specialty in house).
18:40 <@quantumsummers_> a few firms I mean
18:40 <@NeddySeagoon> Is that likely ?
18:40 <@quantumsummers_> so, there is potential that would reduce our back taxes burden, in the case that the IRS "sticks it to us" so to speak
18:41 <@NeddySeagoon> How does  "attorney" translate into English ... solicitor or barrister ?
18:41 <@quantumsummers_> NeddySeagoon: I do not know for certain. I think its possible, but we will not know until we start filing things
18:42 <@quantumsummers_> NeddySeagoon: hmm, well that is a good question. An attorney is here is licensed and a member of the Bar association.
18:42 <@quantumsummers_> which is to say that they are able to legally practice
18:42 <@NeddySeagoon> A solicitor employs a barrister (at geat cost) for special things.  
18:43 <@quantumsummers_> barrister goes to court, right?
18:43 <@NeddySeagoon> both go to court
18:43 <@quantumsummers_> we do not have that distinction in the US
18:43 <@quantumsummers_> that I am aware of anyway
18:43 <@rich0> yup, we just have expensive and cheap lawyers, relatively
18:43 <@quantumsummers_> I do not believe the cost would be great.
18:44 <@NeddySeagoon> ok - I think I get the picture,   In for a penny, in for a pound.   It sounds like it is a spend to save thing. 
18:44 <@NeddySeagoon> We need to do what we need to do to get our 501c3
18:44 <@quantumsummers_> main thing is we may need an advocate in the case that we need to make a case
18:44 <@quantumsummers_> this relates to back taxes only
18:45 <@rich0> probably best to only engage if cpa recommends
18:45 <@quantumsummers_> not the 501c3
18:45 <@quantumsummers_> rich0: exactly
18:45 <@quantumsummers_> I just wanted everyone to be aware of the possibility
18:45 <@NeddySeagoon> Have we made enough to be liable for tax - even if we were a for profit ?
18:45 <@quantumsummers_> NeddySeagoon: yes.
18:46 <@NeddySeagoon> ok, I'm with rich0 ... 
18:46 <@quantumsummers_> the trouble is that the old trustees/officers did not file taxes that we are aware of
18:46 <@quantumsummers_> so, there is a penalty for late filing
18:46 <@robbat2> i have no objections to any findings re needing an attorney for back taxes, per any CPA recommendations
18:46 <@NeddySeagoon> The IRS would know but I would hate to ask
18:46 <@quantumsummers_> I will appraise the board of any necessities regarding legal assistance in this case well ahead of time
18:47 <@NeddySeagoon> do we need a motion ?  Since we are emplying a CPA, we would be daft not to follow their advice
18:47 <@quantumsummers_> NeddySeagoon: you can call the IRS and ask them things, just make sure you remain anonymous 
18:47 <@quantumsummers_> NeddySeagoon: not at this time
18:47 <@quantumsummers_> no motion required yet
18:47 <@NeddySeagoon> ok
18:47 <@rich0> might even ask cpa for recommended lawyerr. i am for.
18:48 <@NeddySeagoon> any more quantumsummers ?
18:48 <@quantumsummers_> rich0: yes, they have a few in house too
18:48 <@quantumsummers_> so, here is the whole enchilada re: back taxes
18:48 <@quantumsummers_> the IRS has a penalty (per day) for late filings with a max of $10,000 per year.
18:48 <@quantumsummers_> I think its $25 per say
18:48 <@quantumsummers_> *day
18:48 <@quantumsummers_> HOWEVER
18:49 <@quantumsummers_> I have been advised that we can make the case that we should not have to pay all that
18:49 <@quantumsummers_> since its a relatively new board, and we are trying to get things straightened out, AND the IRS has not come looking for us as of now.
18:49 <@quantumsummers_> the last bit is key'
18:50 <@quantumsummers_> which is why I was upset by what wltjr was threatening (as it would mean my ass)
18:50 <@NeddySeagoon> understood
18:50 <@quantumsummers_> sooo, the real emphasis is that we need to get the ducks in a row as quickly as possible
18:50 <@NeddySeagoon> quantumsummers, what help do you need ?
18:51 <@quantumsummers_> based on what was decided today, I can get this rolling on Monday, first thing
18:51 <@quantumsummers_> NeddySeagoon: I have everything the CPA has requested. (I have been working with them on this for awhile now, they were not charging us as it was preliminary)
18:51 <@NeddySeagoon> Can you email the alias with a timescale, when you have one
18:51 <@quantumsummers_> NeddySeagoon: yes sir
18:51 <@rich0> sounds good to me. fyi will be akf for 10 mins
18:52 <@quantumsummers_> I am thinking for the back filings 3-5 weeks
18:52 <@quantumsummers_> for the 501c3, 4-6 weels
18:52 <@quantumsummers_> in parallel
18:52 <@NeddySeagoon> that sounds pretty good
18:52 <@dabbott> sooner the better
18:52 <@quantumsummers_> no joke
18:52 <@NeddySeagoon> agreed
18:52 <@NeddySeagoon> any more ?
18:53 <@quantumsummers_> Total estimated cost for all the above is conservatively $8000
18:53 <@quantumsummers_> that includes all filing fees with the states, 501c3 filing fee, CPA fee. It does not include any penalty we may have with the IRS
18:53 <@NeddySeagoon> Thats a one time thing ... what about maintainence going forward ?
18:54 <@NeddySeagoon> You can't estimate the IRS penalty
18:54 <@quantumsummers_> maintenance going forward will be minimal, once I have everything setup. The general filing cost per year for federal and state taxes is ~$1000
18:54 <@quantumsummers_> to have the CPA do it
18:54 <@quantumsummers_> maybe a little less if I can get things automated enough
18:54 <@NeddySeagoon> Go ahead - you have the motion of support
18:54 <@quantumsummers_> working on that for the companies anyway
18:54 <@quantumsummers_> the automation I mean
18:55 <@quantumsummers_> NeddySeagoon: ok.
18:55 <@quantumsummers_> I have one last thing
18:56 <@quantumsummers_> I would like to have the by laws gone through by an attorney in collaboration with the CPA
18:56 <@NeddySeagoon> Motion ?
18:56 <@quantumsummers_> not yet
18:56 <@quantumsummers_> I will have the CPA tell me what we need, if anything
18:56 <@quantumsummers_> she will know if we need to have some additional language in there
18:56 <@NeddySeagoon> Seems line a good idea. 
18:56 <@dabbott> quantumsummers, noted
18:57 <@quantumsummers_> if we need additional language I would prefer to have an attorney do it
18:57 <@NeddySeagoon> sure
18:57 <@quantumsummers_> ok, let see... I think that it all
18:57 <@quantumsummers_> any questions
18:57 <@quantumsummers_> ?
18:57 <@NeddySeagoon> thanks quantumsummers you have had a busy month
18:58 <@dabbott> what about contacting one of the accountant volunteers for dual role as asst secretary, one even sent us his resume :)
18:58 <@quantumsummers_> dabbott that is an excellent idea
18:58 <@quantumsummers_> NeddySeagoon: its my pleasure
18:58 <@NeddySeagoon> When do you intend to present the treasurers report ?
18:59 <@quantumsummers_> well, it would be nice to have it done by the CPA when we end our fiscal year, but I can prepare a preliminary report within a week I think
18:59 <@dabbott> quantumsummers, if there is anything we can help with be sure and ask
18:59 <@quantumsummers_> I have the data for this year up to 2 week ago
19:00 <@NeddySeagoon> quantumsummers_, we need something to close the AGM off.  We agreed we would have a EGM in August to shift the reporting year
19:00 <@quantumsummers_> dabbott yes thanks, I am bad at that, but will try to make reasonable requests
19:00 <@quantumsummers_> NeddySeagoon: ok, I will make a report this week then. I will include last fiscal year too,  since the CPA will be working on that starting asap
19:01 <@NeddySeagoon> the bylaws only let us slip a month per year
19:01 <@quantumsummers_> yes. Sorry for the delay in producing the report
19:01 <@NeddySeagoon> quantumsummers_, thanks.  Anything else ?
19:01 <@quantumsummers_> NeddySeagoon: nothing more from me.
19:02 <@NeddySeagoon> next item 4 bugs
19:02 <@NeddySeagoon> We need up update our NM filing to remove fmmcor
19:03 <@quantumsummers_> I will do that this week.
19:03 <@NeddySeagoon> Thats his business address
19:03 <@quantumsummers_> its $10
19:03 <@dabbott> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=296766
19:03 <@NeddySeagoon> quantumsummers, thanks - now the election results are in
19:03 <@quantumsummers_> we will now use my office as the main physical address, and my PO box as main mailing address
19:04 <@quantumsummers_> I think I can provide a fax number as well, via efax
19:04 <@quantumsummers_> unless anyone has a better service in mind
19:04 <@NeddySeagoon> quantumsummers, Don't we need an in stage NM address too - hence the need for Waye Chew
19:04 <@NeddySeagoon> state*
19:04 <@quantumsummers_> NeddySeagoon: yes, that is our registered agent
19:04 <@quantumsummers_> his address remains
19:04 <@quantumsummers_> but no mail should go there
19:04 <@NeddySeagoon> Ah .. ok.  I understand the differene
19:05 <@quantumsummers_> we need an agent in the state at all times to do business there
19:05 <@quantumsummers_> hence why filing in Missouri will be convenient
19:05 <@NeddySeagoon> quantumsummers_, be careful with the fax number.  You may get forums coppa forms there.
19:06 <@quantumsummers_> hmm, well that is ok since its all digital
19:06 <@NeddySeagoon> 5. New business
19:06 <@NeddySeagoon> Proposal to build a set of MIPS development computers.
19:07 <@NeddySeagoon> I propose that we fund this in stages as per the detail I posted to the alias
19:07 <@quantumsummers_> seconded
19:07 <@quantumsummers_> the proposal is well done
19:07 <@NeddySeagoon> Vote
19:07 <@NeddySeagoon> aye
19:07 <@dabbott> As per mail alias yes
19:07 <@quantumsummers_> aye
19:08 <@NeddySeagoon> rich0, robbat2 ?
19:08 <@NeddySeagoon> carried anyway
19:08 <@dabbott> NeddySeagoon, nice work with setting that up :)
19:08 <@rich0> aye
19:08 <@robbat2> aye
19:09 <@NeddySeagoon> DiscoLibre Venezuela to be listed on the web as vendors.   have one question.
19:09 <@NeddySeagoon> Do they work as per GPL at cost or is it a money making venture ?
19:10 <@dabbott> money making afaik
19:10 <@NeddySeagoon> dabbott, they they need to offer us a %
19:11 <@NeddySeagoon> I can't read the site. 
19:11 <@dabbott> I will email them and find out what they want, official or non official
19:11 <@NeddySeagoon> dabbott, ok
19:11 <@NeddySeagoon> held over until next month
19:12 <@NeddySeagoon> Larry The Cow - Apply for a Trademark ?
19:12 <@NeddySeagoon> Can we, its been around for a long time
19:12 <@quantumsummers_> that will cost approx $2500
19:13 <@dabbott> What is the procedure
19:13 <@rich0> not sure it is essential.  has anybody looked at Debian's logo policy.  I like it - they have separate logos for official vs community use and terms for each
19:13 <@quantumsummers_> get an attorney to file the paperwork
19:13 <@NeddySeagoon> Should we apply for a trademark then.   Its not like the G logo
19:14 <@quantumsummers_> I do not feel the necessity
19:14 <@NeddySeagoon> rich0, I'll put that on my reading list
19:14 <@rich0> I tend to agree - the copyright and derived nature of the mark makes it weak anyway.
19:14 <@NeddySeagoon> quantumsummers, I don't either
19:14 <@quantumsummers_> I can talk to my main attorney about it, informally
19:15 <@rich0> reason I mentioned debian is that their general logo can be used for anybody under certain circumstances - kind of like mozilla's
19:15 <@quantumsummers_> I am going thru it now with some work stiff
19:15 <@quantumsummers_> *stuff
19:15 <@quantumsummers_> rich0: I like that, must read up
19:15 <@rich0> If I burn CDs from the debian official ISOs I can charge $1k and use the community logo, for example
19:15 <@dabbott> I like the idea of one official logo and the more relaxed community logos
19:15 <@NeddySeagoon> dabbott, Me too but that does not mean we need to trademake it
19:16 <@rich0> Only debian projects can use the official logos - which are similar but different
19:16 <@dabbott> can we sell Larry the cow logo t-shirts in the store?
19:16 <@NeddySeagoon> Larray and G and quite different but both associated with Gentoo
19:16 <@quantumsummers_> dabbott sure we can
19:17 <@dabbott> or would that need to be put in a community store
19:17 <@rich0> Still, until we change policy I'm all for following the status quo with DiscoLibre.
19:17 <@quantumsummers_> this reminds me of something, the gentoo-ev site says Gentoo (R) is a registered trademark of Gentoo eV 
19:17 <@rich0> And either way I'm not sure Larry is a good mark - we don't even own copyright on it.  No harm in using it legally, but not a good way to build an IP base.
19:18 <+a3li> quantumsummers_: what's wrong with that?
19:18 <@NeddySeagoon> rich0, Policy is that if its like GPL, a nominal cost, its fine, we give them a link.   If they make money, we want a cut
19:18 <@quantumsummers_> a3li: Gentoo is registered to the Foundation
19:18 <@NeddySeagoon> quantumsummers_, thats correct.  the e.V own the mark in Europe
19:18 <@rich0> NeddySeagoon: yup - no issue with that and any change should be carefully considered
19:18 <+a3li> quantumsummers_: we *do* have a trademark in europe
19:18 <@quantumsummers_> ok then :D
19:19 <@NeddySeagoon> quantumsummers, and its registration there predates the Foundation :)
19:19 <@rich0> though GPL doesn't prohibit making money off of the binaries - it is only the source that has to be nominal cost and only to those you've already sold binaries to
19:19 <@NeddySeagoon> rich0, true - I was likening it to the GPL.
19:20 <@NeddySeagoon> Any more on Lary the Cow
19:20 <@NeddySeagoon> Item 6 Memership Applications
19:20 <@dabbott> Yes all three
19:20 <@NeddySeagoon> All gentoo devs - Montion at accept
19:21 <@quantumsummers_> aye to all devs
19:21 <@NeddySeagoon> aye
19:21 <@rich0> aye
19:21 <@robbat2> aye
19:21 <@NeddySeagoon> Carried
19:21 <@NeddySeagoon> Item 7 Advertising Requests
19:21 <@NeddySeagoon> StartCom
19:21 <@NeddySeagoon> robbat2, this is in exchange for Certs ?
19:22 <@robbat2> startcom bit is on hold atm, so a timeline for a sec
19:22 <@robbat2> StartCom approached us offering certs at greatly discounted (just basically the initial validation cost)
19:23 <@robbat2> the trustees approved that, and at approximately the same time we got an offer from Comodo
19:24 <@robbat2> that was late April
19:25 <@robbat2> i haven't actually spent any more w/ StartCom yet, as I had to get various paperwork in order (their validation is of me directly [passport etc], and then the foundation's corporation stuff)
19:25 < sping> i missed speaking up on larry the cow - can we do a second round on that? i don't feel it has got the needed attention yet as to what i see in the log above
19:25 <@robbat2> in Comodo's favour, they actually use Gentoo
19:26 <@robbat2> sping, wait for open floor
19:26 < sping> robbat2: sure
19:26 <@robbat2> StartCom uses linux, but hasn't said anything about Gentoo in specific
19:27 <@NeddySeagoon> why would we choose one rather than the other  ?
19:28 <@robbat2> i need to follow up w/ Comodo to see if they would offer us similar stuff to what StartCom would (basically unlimited certs), as their initial email wasn't conclusion
19:28 <@rich0> I think Comodo's offer was better (free I think - but not certain on the details / comparison).  My biggest concern was that we said yes to StartCom already.  I don't like saying yes and then saying "wait, we got a better offer."
19:29 <@robbat2> mainly my concern is that startcom asked for what I consider to be a LOT of my personal information after I got started w/ them
19:29 <@NeddySeagoon> rich0, I'm with you there
19:29 <@quantumsummers_> robbat2: that would bother me too
19:29 <@rich0> robbat2: if the concern is over the details (personal info, etc), then I see that as grounds for reconsideration.
19:29 <@quantumsummers_> there is no reason for it since we are incorporated
19:30 <@NeddySeagoon> robbat2, Why - Its gentoo they are certifying. Not an individual
19:30 <@rich0> we should in any case make sure that Comodo isn't just going to be the same way before canceling work-in-progress
19:30 <@quantumsummers_> exactly the point, they should not tie it to a person, but the organization
19:30 <@quantumsummers_> robbat2: are the EV certs?
19:30 <@robbat2> StartCom's model is that people can be really verified, while organizations are less certain (eg who really is behind an org)
19:31 <@rich0> I can see how they need to verify that the person is legally able to represent the organization.  
19:31 <@robbat2> in theory, EV in both offers
19:31 <@quantumsummers_> that is good I guess
19:31 <@rich0> I can call up and say "gimme a hotmail.com cert - MS is a corporation and here is a copy of their public paperwork"
19:31 <@robbat2> they phone the # on the WHOIS records too ;-)
19:31 <@robbat2> which points to me presently
19:32 <@quantumsummers_> ah, as technical contact, yes
19:32 <@rich0> If the personal detail aspect is the same in both cases, then I don't see how we can ethically back out on StartCom unless there is a material change in the agreement.
19:32 <@quantumsummers_> I agree with rich0 here, although I do like the fact that comodo uses gentoo.
19:33 <@NeddySeagoon> I am fairly protective of my personal data.
19:33 <@NeddySeagoon> robbat2, how does it compatre to what CAcert wanted ?
19:33 <@rich0> agreed on liking that aspect of Comodo, and perhaps we should explain the situation to them and see if they're still interested come time of renewal.
19:34 <@NeddySeagoon> compare*
19:34 <@robbat2> CACert has seen my id in person during their verification process (many years ago), but explicitly does not keep it or want it to be sent to them
19:34 <@NeddySeagoon> That sounds fair
19:34 <@NeddySeagoon> Then they can't lose it like Sony :)
19:35 <@robbat2> re losing it, my id data for StartCom would be in Israel, and I don't know what control I do have if they lose it
19:36 <@NeddySeagoon> robbat2, its your personal info.  If you think its overly intrusive.  You have my support to drop negiotiations
19:36 <@robbat2> Comodo is US-based, New Jersey, so I have more control of my info there
19:36 <@robbat2> ok, so re handling this:
19:36 <@quantumsummers_> robbat2: no control at all, but I have several contacts in the gov't there if things get rough
19:37 <@quantumsummers_> proceed, sorry to interrupt
19:37 <@robbat2> i'll contact Comodo, and see if they can reasonably offer us what StartCom was, without my needing so much of my personal info
19:37 <@robbat2> s/without my/without/
19:38 <@robbat2> the $50/bi-annual fee that StartCom wanted wasn't a problem, so if they Comodo wants that, that's fine by me
19:38 <@NeddySeagoon> robbat2, you are clearly not happy with Startcom and their demands - just drop them.
19:39 <@rich0> I'm fine with switching as long as the reason is the personal info and there is a difference.  That wasn't known at the time of the agreement, so I see it as a valid reason to go back if necessary.
19:40 <@rich0> If in the end we do go with Comodo we should still thank StartCom for their offer.  They made it sincerely.
19:40 <@robbat2> yes
19:40 <@NeddySeagoon> I'm fine with sticking with CAcert if the personal info demands are unreasonable, as judged by robbat2 
19:40 <@rich0> I'm fine with that as well.
19:41 <@robbat2> we do need to move beyond CACert for forums/bugs long term, to make them more accessible to users
19:41 <@robbat2> for the smaller sites, CACert is fine
19:41 <@NeddySeagoon> robbat2, its your call.
19:41 <@robbat2> i'll discuss w/ Comodo and make a more informed decision
19:41 <@robbat2> and inform the board of matters
19:42 <@NeddySeagoon> We will hold over StartCom until next month
19:42 <@quantumsummers_> thanks robbat2
19:42 <@NeddySeagoon> Date of Next Meeting - 19th Jun 2011 19:00 UTC
19:42 <@quantumsummers_> +1
19:42 <@NeddySeagoon> I should be ok 
19:42 <@dabbott> +1
19:42 <@robbat2> +1 on my calendar
19:43 <@NeddySeagoon> rich0, 
19:43 <@rich0> +1 - and I should still be free :)
19:43 <@NeddySeagoon> :)
19:43 <@NeddySeagoon> Any other business ... ?
19:43 <@NeddySeagoon> robbat2, ?
19:44 <@quantumsummers_> none from me (this time ;) )
19:44 <@NeddySeagoon> heh
19:44 <@robbat2> none from me, but sping is here for some
19:44 <@NeddySeagoon> I have one item
19:44 <@quantumsummers_> yes/
19:44 < sping> NeddySeagoon: you first
19:45 <@NeddySeagoon> we are about to be asked for DVDs for  http://softwarelivre.org/fisl12  and a banner if there is one in South Ameraca
19:45 <@NeddySeagoon> rafaelmartins will be leading
19:46 <@dabbott> cool
19:46 <@NeddySeagoon> that was my item
19:46 <@NeddySeagoon> dabbott, AoB ?
19:46 <@dabbott> no cool that he is doing it :0
19:46 <@quantumsummers_> fwiw, fedex-kinkos has nice outdorr vinyl 3'x5x banner for $60 (half price) right now. I made one for my wife's company last week, turned out well.
19:47 < sping> on larry: may I?
19:47 <@NeddySeagoon> quantumsummers, Gentoo owns 5.  International shipping is a PITA
19:47 <@quantumsummers_> ok.
19:47 <@NeddySeagoon> rich0, AoB ?
19:47 <@rich0> nothing new for me
19:48 <@NeddySeagoon> sping, 2 minuets
19:48 < sping> NeddySeagoon: what does that mean?
19:48 <@robbat2> 5 banners? i know of 2 of them? where are the other 3?
19:48 <@NeddySeagoon> Responsibilities.  I'll post log, wite to new members and mattst88 
19:48 <@quantumsummers_> NeddySeagoon: thank you.
19:48 <@dabbott> I have the motions
19:48 <@NeddySeagoon> robbat2, I think there are two in Europe
19:49 <@NeddySeagoon> Open Floor
19:49 <@NeddySeagoon> sping, - your turn
19:49 < sping> i currently understand the EULA of font haed inc on larry's head as a license, not trademark
19:50 < sping> that may mean that we cannot derive artwork from it under creative commons
19:50 < sping> which would be bad for the gentoo pool of artwork
19:50 <@NeddySeagoon> sping, do you have a link to the EULA ?
19:50 < sping> http://www.fonthead.com/license
19:51 < sping> most important point is the one on "primary aspect of a product for resale" probably
19:51 <@quantumsummers_> I think what we may have to do is make our own larry head OR ask them for rights to use that "letter" representation freely.
19:51 < sping> if you have a mug with larries head and "gentoo" below it you may argue about primary aspects
19:52 < sping> we can only get a trademark (or free licensing) in co-op with font head inc, of course
19:52 <@rich0> So, here is my thought - we either are allowed by FontHead or not to use the logo in various ways.  Anything we do with trademarks can only take away the rights of others - it cannot do anything to grant rights we don't already have.
19:52 <@NeddySeagoon> sping, we will need to talk with them
19:53 < sping> NeddySeagoon: yes, but we need to know what to ask for before that
19:53 <@NeddySeagoon> rich0, correct - we cannot trademark it
19:53 <@NeddySeagoon> sping, do you have any detailed thoughts ?
19:54 <@dabbott> does it make any difference that drobbins was using it before 2009?
19:54 < sping> dabbott: it may if we had a copy of the EULA version from back then. he doesn't have a copy around as to what he said
19:55 <@quantumsummers_> wayback machine have a copy?
19:55 < sping> the current EULA is newer than the font by several years
19:56 < sping> no, see http://web.archive.org/*/http://www.fonthead.com/license
19:56 <@robbat2> http://replay.web.archive.org/20090105180827/http://www.fonthead.com/fonts/Font-Heads
19:56 <@robbat2> that's the earliest I find on archive.org
19:57 <@rich0> Looking at the oldest copy from Feb 2009 on archive.org I don't see it as being any better from a use standpoint.  That primary purpose bit could get us.
19:57 <@quantumsummers_> perhaps contact should be made. It may be necessary to purchase the rights or something
19:57 <@rich0> Unless somebody has an even older copy we need to work with them regarding licensing.
19:57 <@quantumsummers_> maybe we can request the old versions?
19:58 <@quantumsummers_> surely they have it. or maybe there is an old tarball lying around with it
19:58 <@robbat2> http://replay.web.archive.org/20070127025807/http://fonthead.com/freeware.php
19:58 <@robbat2> "The typefaces on this page are ones that we want you to use and enjoy free of charge. Use them in your personal and commercial projects, websites, logos or whatever else you are designing. "
19:59 <@quantumsummers_> robbat2: nice
19:59 <@robbat2> that 2007 page includes no other limitations
19:59 <@rich0> robbat2: great find
19:59 <@quantumsummers_> so, based on the original license we are free to do whatever
19:59 <@NeddySeagoon> robbat2, good one
19:59 <@robbat2> so maybe we use it, and contact FontHeads and offer attribution and linking back to them
20:00 <@quantumsummers_> they could in theory argue the case, but since all the artwork pre-dates that document I think we are in the clear
20:00 <@dabbott> robbat2, +1
20:00 <@robbat2> sping, are you ok with that?
20:01 <@NeddySeagoon> we should at least talk to them, so they don't find out for themselves and think we are violating the current EULA
20:01 <@quantumsummers_> Yes we should
20:01 <@quantumsummers_> I wonder about any changes to the font that would force us under the new license.
20:01 <@NeddySeagoon> sping, ?
20:01 <@rich0> agreed with this plan.  We could in theory just claim copyright on larry then, and license however we wish, since we're not redistributing the font itself
20:02 < sping> i'm thinking, wait
20:02 <@quantumsummers_> rich0: I agree
20:02 <@rich0> It is a derivative work, clearly, but one which they allowed
20:02 <@robbat2> http://replay.web.archive.org/20050424012841/http://www.fonthead.com/freeware.php <--- earliest appearence of the font heads font
20:02 <@NeddySeagoon> rich0, I think thats splitting hairs - we can't claim copyright on someone elses artwork
20:02 <@rich0> I'd recommend circulating any initial contact letter with the trustees before sending.
20:03 < sping> robbat2: does the TTF windows zip download at that page work for you?
20:03 < sping> robbat2: the zip seems to be odd, not sure yet
20:03 <@quantumsummers_> NeddySeagoon: since its incorporated into a larger work, I think we can.
20:03 <@rich0> Sure we can - larry as a whole is clearly an original creation.  Something that is a derivative work is still copyrightable, you just need a license from whoever you derived it from.
20:03 <@robbat2> sping, the link from the 20050424 page does work yes
20:03 <@quantumsummers_> which, based on the original license we have
20:04 <@rich0> You copyright A, I can copyright ABC.  I still need your permission to distribute it, but you can't distribute ABC without my permission either.
20:04 <@NeddySeagoon> sping it downloads 
20:04 <@dabbott> 2007 download works also
20:04 < sping> robbat2: maybe it's just xarchiver troubling, let me see
20:04 <@robbat2> http://replay.web.archive.org/20050424012841/http://www.fonthead.com/freeware_download.php/fontheads-wtt.zip
20:05 <@robbat2> ok, there is a problem
20:05 <@robbat2> in that zipfile there is a more restrictive license than the page
20:05 <@NeddySeagoon> The licence is the zip file is quite different to the web page
20:06 < sping> yes, the primary aspect thing is in the 2005 zip file license already
20:06 <@robbat2> sorry to get hopes up w/ the 2007/2005 pages
20:06 <@quantumsummers_> alright, we just need to talk with them in this case. that, or prepare for legal wrangling
20:07 <@NeddySeagoon> talk to them first
20:07 <@quantumsummers_> yep
20:07 < sping> robbat2: it's still a great finding
20:07 <@rich0> Yeah, not sure if larry is worth getting in a pitched battle over
20:07 <@NeddySeagoon> Its not
20:07 <@quantumsummers_> make a new one, that would be the easy way to go if our talks fail
20:08 <@NeddySeagoon> yeah
20:08 <@quantumsummers_> pixel shift a bit here and there
20:08 < sping> imho making a new one is no option
20:08 <@quantumsummers_> still retain the iconic look
20:08 <@rich0> It can't just be a pixel-shift.
20:08 <@NeddySeagoon> quantumsummers, that would be a derived work ...
20:08 < sping> pixel shift doesn't help either, it's still derived work
20:08 <@rich0> It has to be clearly defensible as an original creation.
20:09 < sping> actually the version of larry used most looks different already - that came from rectracing from bitmap afaik
20:09 <@rich0> Semblence might be ok in some regards, but the more different the better - at least the face.
20:09 <@NeddySeagoon> we won't solve it here and now
20:09 < sping> re-tracing i mean
20:09 < sping> so what are we going to ask font head inc?
20:10 < sping> releasing the head as CC-BY-SA?
20:10 < sping> dropping the primary aspect thing on larry?
20:10 <@quantumsummers_> lets discuss over email and try to get something to them in a week. sound ok? who on the board wants the task?
20:10 <@NeddySeagoon> can gentoo use the glyph
20:10 < sping> NeddySeagoon: ?
20:11 < sping> NeddySeagoon: what do you mean?
20:11 <@quantumsummers_> glyph == letter
20:11 <@quantumsummers_> "Font Head people: can we use it?"
20:11 < sping> sure, i don't get the rest of the point
20:12 <@NeddySeagoon> sping, Gentoo has used the Larry the Cow glyph for as long as I can remember.  As far as I know there was never any agreement with the font owner
20:12 <@quantumsummers_> we simply need to ask them if we can have the right to use the letter for our stuff freely
20:12 <@quantumsummers_> or continue to exercise our right  as the case may be
20:13 < sping> NeddySeagoon: i suspect the past usage fit the EULA - in that case no extra agreement would be needed, right?
20:13 <@NeddySeagoon> quantumsummers, and in exchange for attribution
20:13 <@quantumsummers_> NeddySeagoon: sounds fine to me, and more than they get now
20:13 <@rich0> Might not hurt to include a copy of larry as a whole with the letter.  So that they understand that the head is part of a greater work.
20:13 <@robbat2> can somebody trace down our earliest use of Larry?
20:13 <@NeddySeagoon> sping, I suspect it does too but after finding that more restivtive licence in the zip file, it may just have been overlooked
20:13 <@quantumsummers_> robbat2: you seem to have the knack ;)
20:14 < sping> NeddySeagoon: good point
20:14 -!- Dr_Who [~tgall@206.9.88.154] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
20:14 <@NeddySeagoon> restrictive*
20:15 <@NeddySeagoon> quantumsummers, you are wearing your Teflon overcoat
20:15 <@rich0> The webpage wording still offers that anybody can use it for almost anything, including as a logo.
20:15 <@rich0> Clearly logos get made into T-shirts and what have you.
20:15 < sping> robbat2: 8 years before at least: http://sources.gentoo.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/gentoo-src/gentoo-web/images/fishhead.gif?hideattic=0&view=markup
20:15 <@NeddySeagoon> rich0, at best - the licences conflict.  That means we should have asked 
20:15 <@rich0> So, you could argue that was a license.  We should mention that webpage when we contact them.
20:16 <@rich0> NeddySeagoon: agree on the SHOULD.  
20:16 <@robbat2> ooh, that predates the 2005 link I pasted in
20:16 <@quantumsummers_>  bug 27727
20:16 < willikins> quantumsummers_: https://bugs.gentoo.org/27727 "Larry can NOT be a Cow."; Docs-user, Other; RESO, WONT; jensthiede:docs-team
20:16 <@quantumsummers_> http://blog.codefront.net/2004/11/29/larry-the-cow/
20:16 <@rich0> However, failing to ask does not in inself surrender rights, it just gives up the opportunity to get them explicitly before becoming committed.
20:16 < sping> i can make a letter proposal and send it to trustees@g.o for review
20:16 <@robbat2> Wed Jan 2 20:53:58 2002 UTC (9 years, 4 months ago)
20:17 <@dabbott> sping, that would be super :)
20:17 <@quantumsummers_> super duper even
20:17 <@robbat2> rev 1.1 of the fishhead.gif file is 2 jan 2002
20:18 <@NeddySeagoon> sping, please do.
20:19 <@NeddySeagoon> Swift is still around - he may know something
20:19 <@NeddySeagoon> Any more for open floor ?
20:20 <@quantumsummers_> NeddySeagoon: I asked Swift
20:20 <@quantumsummers_> he may join the channel
20:20 <@quantumsummers_> if I caught him in time
20:20 <@NeddySeagoon> ok
20:21 <@robbat2> http://replay.web.archive.org/200012060909/http://www.fonthead.com/freeware.html <-- new earliest discovery of the fontheads page, but download links are broken there
20:22 <@quantumsummers_> seems like drobbins may have been buddies with those peeps 
20:22 < sping> robbat2: the font itself exists since 10-11-2000 at least
20:23 <@NeddySeagoon> quantumsummers_, that figures 
20:24 < sping> quantumsummers_: how come you think so?
20:24 <@quantumsummers_> didn't he say as much on irc?
20:25 < sping> quantumsummers_: that was referring to another font, not larry's head
20:25 <@quantumsummers_> ah. ok
20:25 < sping> quantumsummers_: if you refer to the custom font by a friend of his family thing
20:25 <@quantumsummers_> ah yes, that is correct
20:26 <@quantumsummers_> getting old, memory is imperfect
20:27 <@NeddySeagoon> any more for open floor ?
20:27 <@quantumsummers_> well, I need to attend to some house/marital duties ... anything else to discuss?
20:27  * NeddySeagoon bangs the gavel to close the meeting

Post meeting chatter included 

20:27  * rich0 seconds
20:27 <@quantumsummers_> thanks y'all :)
20:27 <@NeddySeagoon> Thank you everyone
20:27 < sping> any news on forwaring my questions to the lawer contact you have?
20:28 < sping> okay, let's do that with e-mail
20:28 < sping> see you
20:28 <@quantumsummers_> sping: have not heard back yet. I'll poke again.
20:28 -!- SwifT [~Sven@gentoo/user/SwifT] has joined #gentoo-trustees
20:28 -!- mode/#gentoo-trustees [+v SwifT] by ChanServ
20:28 <@NeddySeagoon> sping, thanks
20:28 <@quantumsummers_> hey SwifT :)
20:28 <+SwifT> hiya
20:28 <@NeddySeagoon> Hi SwifT 
20:28 <+SwifT> so what's the question exactly?
20:29 <@quantumsummers_> SwifT: do you have any info on larry's lineage?
20:29 <@quantumsummers_> mainly regarding licensing for use by Gentoo
20:30 <+SwifT> well, larry was already present in gentoo before I arrived; I can remember that the first larry sign was based on a font, but I'm not sure if that changed since
20:30 <+SwifT> you know, a font where each character is a drawing
20:30 <+SwifT> seemant might know the exacts of this, he was already a senior developer when I joined :)
20:30 <@quantumsummers_> SwifT: yes, we are aware of that now, the font bit anyway
20:30 <@robbat2> we've got it traced back to 2002/01/02 by Gentoo
20:30 <@quantumsummers_> seemant would be good to ask
20:31 <+a3li> might be a bit difficult, quantumsummers_ 
20:31 <@quantumsummers_> a3li: how's that?
20:31 <+a3li> he basically 'left' gentoo yesterday or so
20:31 <@NeddySeagoon> seemant is still around too
20:31 <+a3li> or rather left behind
20:31 <@quantumsummers_> what?
20:31 <+SwifT> heh, trying to look it up redirects me to http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/desktop/artwork/artwork.xml ;-)
20:31 <@quantumsummers_> Well I missed that somehow
20:31 <@quantumsummers_> I know where to find him outside gentoo
20:31 <@quantumsummers_> a3li: what happened?
20:32 <+SwifT> I'll see if I can dig something up in my e-mail archives, but I'm afraid I won't be of much use more about it
20:32 <+a3li> quantumsummers_: he just wanted to move on, I guess. no details I can share
20:32 <@quantumsummers_> SwifT: thanks all the same
20:32 <+SwifT> np
20:32 -!- SwifT [~Sven@gentoo/user/SwifT] has left #gentoo-trustees []
20:32 <@quantumsummers_> a3li: huh, odd.
20:33 <@NeddySeagoon> hes still on freenode
20:34 <@NeddySeagoon> I'll include this post meeting chatter in the log