Dear board
Perhaps it would be useful to have a teleconference sometime in the
coming week or two so that we are all fully up to date. Personally I've
been away for two weeks, and I would find it useful to have an informal
briefing to get back up to speed.
Regards
Shane
--
Shane Coughlan
FTF Coordinator
Free Software Foundation Europe
Office: +41435000366 ext 408 / Mobile: +41792633406
coughlan(a)fsfeurope.org
Support Free Software > http://fsfe.org
Hi Graham,
Hi Shane,
SAP asks whether they can introduce Certified Open at the meeting of
the Business Software Alliance (BSA) in Brussels. That should mean
Francisco Mignorance + Microsoft + possible others.
Are we ready for that step or should I tell them to hold it off?
Regards,
Georg
--
Georg C. F. Greve <greve(a)fsfeurope.org>
Free Software Foundation Europe (http://fsfeurope.org)
Join the Fellowship and protect your freedom! (http://www.fsfe.org)
What everyone should know about DRM (http://DRM.info)
Dear all
I just updated the CO product and services framework to include the
latest version of the Open Standard definition.
Regards
Shane
--
Shane Coughlan
FTF Coordinator
Free Software Foundation Europe
Office: +41435000366 ext 408 / Mobile: +41792633406
coughlan(a)fsfeurope.org
Support Free Software > http://fsfe.org
Hi all,
I've been trying to put together a couple of questions that I think
people should be asking before voting on MS-OOXML. The idea is to keep
this extremely short so it can be easily handed out to people.
Feedback appreciated.
Regards,
Georg
--
Georg C. F. Greve <greve(a)fsfeurope.org>
Free Software Foundation Europe (http://fsfeurope.org)
Join the Fellowship and protect your freedom! (http://www.fsfe.org)
What everyone should know about DRM (http://DRM.info)
FYI.
Attached the legal feedback (in German). I'll try a quick and dirty
translation as best I can. If things are too obfuscated as a result,
let me know:
1. Certified Open Ltd already exists and the MoU should prepare the
collaboration of OFE, FSFE and a third party inside Certified Open
and document the planning. The precise structure is still open. On
FSFE's side the activitly will be taxed as economic activity, and
will be coordinated with FSFE's tax consultants.
2. In my opinion the MoU should be more clear on how to split the
cost of the preparation phase. This in particular concerns
a) the general cost for lawyers/notary and register in relation
to issues of association/organisation law, in particular if
FSFE should become partner/member in the Certified Open Ltd;
b) the costs for the time invested by the partners and that
should be reimbursed from income to the Ltd. For this it might
be useful to be concrete in terms of daily/hourly rates, and
possible a maximum amount for pre-invested time and travel
expense. Additionally: What happens if this does not work and
no sufficient income is generated.
3. The MoU creates the impression that more than one third party
should be involved. If this only concerns a single third party,
that should be clarified and the party should be named, if
possible.
4. Legal consequences in case one partner leaves are still
unclear. Why the "notice period" in a)? What should happen within
the 6 months if one party starts to block things -- is this not
more an obstacle than the partner leaving immediately? Who covers
the cost to that were incurred until that point?
In b) the three months period makes no sense, imho. If a party
leaves, there is no way the remaining parties could be stopped
from continuing things in any way they please.
5. There should be some word on the applicable law and place of
court if the MoU should be legally enforceable or if you want to
document seriousness. If this is only as a "reminder" it is not
necessary.
6. Maybe it would be beneficial to add a sentence that shaping of
Certified Open will be done by a commonly agreed upon statute.
--
Georg C. F. Greve <greve(a)fsfeurope.org>
Free Software Foundation Europe (http://fsfeurope.org)
Join the Fellowship and protect your freedom! (http://www.fsfe.org)
What everyone should know about DRM (http://DRM.info)
Hi all,
at the ODF session of the Confederation of Indian Industries (CII) in
Calcutta I also mentioned Certified Open. The presentation is attached
for archival purposes below. I also suggest we update the web page, as
I would prefer people to find something better when they take a look.
Already sent mail to media(a)certifiedopen.com about that.
Regards,
Georg
--
Georg C. F. Greve <greve(a)fsfeurope.org>
Free Software Foundation Europe (http://fsfeurope.org)
Join the Fellowship and protect your freedom! (http://www.fsfe.org)
What everyone should know about DRM (http://DRM.info)
Dear all
I will be on vacation in Japan until the 22nd of June visiting my partner.
I will not be checking email regularly during this time, though in case
of an emergency I can be reached at +819062814167. This is my partner's
mobile phone. Her name is Masayo Okami.
Regards
Shane
--
Shane Coughlan
FTF Coordinator
Free Software Foundation Europe
Office: +41435000366 ext 408 / Mobile: +41792633406
coughlan(a)fsfeurope.org
Support Free Software > http://fsfe.org
Dear Board
Please find attached a conceptual draft of the terms of reference for
the governance council of Certified Open.
A few questions:
- Is it correct that the governance council would be the highest
decision-making body for the Certified Open programme?
- Are the objectives of the governance council conceptually correct in
this draft? We have not yet discussed them in detail.
Comments, additions, corrects and total rewrites most welcome.
Regards
Shane
--
Shane Coughlan
FTF Coordinator
Free Software Foundation Europe
Office: +41435000366 ext 408 / Mobile: +41792633406
coughlan(a)fsfeurope.org
Support Free Software > http://fsfe.org