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