Reply
Thread Tools
woody14619's Avatar
Posts: 1,439 | Thanked: 3,160 times | Joined on Dec 2009 @ Rochester, NY
#51
The document will be reviewed (and has at least once already been reviewed) by a real lawyer.

Realistically, a good chunk of this came from a pretty standard boiler plate, that we've been slowly customizing to fit the needs of the community. There have already been a couple of "you need to change this" instances, where changes made would be something contestable legally where it put in place.

In case you feel like it though, or if you have access to a lawyer and are willing to ask them to review this on your own dime, any feedback or input would be appreciated.
__________________
Maemo Council Member: May 2012 - November 2012
Hildon Foundation founding member.
Hildon Foundation Board of Directors: March 2013 - Jan 15, 2014
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to woody14619 For This Useful Post:
Posts: 1,603 | Thanked: 979 times | Joined on Aug 2010
#52
Originally Posted by woody14619 View Post
As noted previously in the thread, we can not use the name Maemo, as it is trademarked by Nokia, and Nokia has already said it will not transfer the trademark, and would probably take issue with our legal entity taking that as part of the name.
did anyone consider NOKIA may let us continue to use the Maemo.org patronyme?
it would be insane not to plane for alternatives to Maemo.org after 31st of December, but what if... on 1st of January Maemo.org and the repositories continue to run as usual?
it isn't only about this Community of developer & fans. there are still plain normal mobile phone users out there that use N9s or even N900s but who have never heard of Maemo.org or its MeeGo counterpart.
will those customers be left without repositories and ways of updating their devices?

Originally Posted by woody14619 View Post
This was discussed on the mailing list some time ago, and a rather thorough explanation was given. Unfortunately because I replied from the wrong account, the mail is still awaiting moderation there. (Which apparently now has no moderator?)

This is the relevant discussion from my correspondence archives:
looks like i missed that one
anyway...

NFP foundation responsabilities + Council tasks too much for one Council, is it?
how about expending the number of members of the Council (and rename it if you like ) so that the new Council can handle everything.

that would simplify the structure and the organisation and planing of meetings (if some ppl were to be in both organs)
and for the plain members who'd like to attend or even take part in the meetings...

just thoughts
__________________
information is a necessary though no sufficient condition to rationality...
 
Posts: 1,513 | Thanked: 2,247 times | Joined on Mar 2006 @ US
#53
Originally Posted by misterc View Post
do we still need a Council after the NFP foundation is created and has taken over?
currently Council is here the liaison with the "owner" of Maemo.org i.e. NOKIA
as soon as NOKIA is gone (at the speed at which they are bleeding cash before the end of 2013 ) the Council's primary function is gone. Board is in direct contact with the Community (at least let's hope that they won't get so political so quickly ) and whatever other functions the Council has, the Board should take over, no?
or will the admin of that NFP foundation take sooooo much time???

.
Good questions. I hope the Board Candidates will address them.

Note, with respect to the bylaws, it's not necessarily a question of whether the Board should take over whatever is left of Council's functions. The Board has the authority to appoint committees so they can always appoint a committee to perform some function, like a membership committee, that needs more time than they have and achieve a separation of responsibilities that way. The issue is whether the Council and its assigned functions should be baked in to the Bylaws and, if so, should operate the way it has in the past? I look forward to seeing the new karma proposal from Board candidate Texrat.
__________________
3-time Maemo Community Council Member
Co-Founder, Hildon Foundation
 

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to SD69 For This Useful Post:
Moderator | Posts: 5,137 | Thanked: 3,983 times | Joined on Oct 2009
#54
I've been meaning to put this to you guys ages ago, sorry for taking so long but…

Why not look at merging the organisational and server infrastructure of Maemo.org & the MeR project instead of going it alone?*
Seems like a total "win win" situation to me, much larger pool of human & other resources at your disposal.
MeR derivatives are much more likely attract corporate funding going forward, but Maemo derivatives are still a much larger/stronger community.
So the latter could provide much needed user funding/contributions at times when things get a bit lean or between dips in corporate funding etc.
Longer-term MeR derivatives will be a valuable lifeline towards ensuring that Maemo derivatives can continue to be strong/healthy.
MeR will benefit thanks to much more cross-pollination, plus a gradual shift of Maemo users to one or more MeR derivatives will occur.

The way I see it, maemo.org could basically become the doco & support wing of MeR, Maemo derivatives could still be a very important sub-set of that.
Sure maemo.org members would have to deal with the fact that there may be slightly less chance for them to get into the council or board, but that's a minor issue.
Apparently council have discussed it all very briefly with MeR, but MeR's happy to discuss all the pros cons in much more detail.
None of this has to happen as part of the transition if it's too late to change tack now, this is something that we can take our time with.
I think this would be the perfect situation when it comes to domain/site, being able to use merproject.org makes sense on so many levels LT.
Of course, we may always have to keep maemo.org around for certain practical/legal reasons, but for newer content mercommunity/project.org just makes sense.

I wish I'd put this to you guys much earlier, it's probably too late for you to see it in time for the meeting.
(which I wont be attending, already 230am here, meeting's at 5am my time).
But nevertheless it'd be interesting to hear your thoughts on how/why it was ruled out so readily with little close inspection.
Perhaps it never crossed your mind, perhaps you came to the conclusion that it's a detrimental approach overall?

Cheers.
*there could be variations on that too i.e. organisationally one entity, but separate infra etc.

Last edited by jalyst; 2012-09-21 at 16:56.
 
woody14619's Avatar
Posts: 1,439 | Thanked: 3,160 times | Joined on Dec 2009 @ Rochester, NY
#55
Originally Posted by misterc View Post
did anyone consider NOKIA may let us continue to use the Maemo.org patronyme?
That is, in fact, the goal: To have Maemo.org stay running. We are working with Nokia to do just what you're saying. But Council is not a legal entity, and can not sign paperwork and do other things needed to pull this off. Thus the need for a new legal entity. Also, while in those discussions it has been made VERY clear that Nokia did not think it wise to create a legal entity using Maemo in or as part of the name. Taking ownership of a site on Nokia's behalf is one thing (they do that now with contracts to the current provider). Naming yourself with their trademark and running amok is something very different.

Originally Posted by misterc View Post
will those customers be left without repositories and ways of updating their devices?
If we don't form this entity and do this, then your answer is yes. If we do form it, we can probably continue this service.


Originally Posted by misterc View Post
NFP foundation responsabilities + Council tasks too much for one Council, is it?
how about expending the number of members of the Council (and rename it if you like ) so that the new Council can handle everything.
Or, keep two separate entities... Both were considered. Again, the way it works now is two separate groups. The fact is that we've had two past Council members, who had no interest in being Council again, apply for Board positions. If the positions were one in the same, I'm not sure we would have that.

Also, to "abolish" Council would mean major changes to the rules here (referendums, arguments, etc). Far simpler to let things here remain the same and build on top of that, using a structure we already know pretty well. If there is a desire to merge later down the road (and I think there may very well be) that can be addressed later. Preferably when we're not trying to deal with preventing the servers being shut off in 3 months....
__________________
Maemo Council Member: May 2012 - November 2012
Hildon Foundation founding member.
Hildon Foundation Board of Directors: March 2013 - Jan 15, 2014
 

The Following User Says Thank You to woody14619 For This Useful Post:
woody14619's Avatar
Posts: 1,439 | Thanked: 3,160 times | Joined on Dec 2009 @ Rochester, NY
#56
Originally Posted by jalyst View Post
Why not look at merging the organisational and server infrastructure of Maemo.org & the MeR project instead of going it alone?
We in fact did just that. The problem being that Mer and friends were not exactly having an easy go of it at the time. There was infighting, legal hand wringing, and lots of other things going on, magnitudes worse than what Council has gone though in the past 5 months. Mind you, we've not looked at them again recently, because we've been busy getting our own ducks in a row.

And keep in mind... Just because we have a separate group, doesn't mean we can't link up in just these ways later down the road. We're going out of our way to make sure that everything is setup to keep all doors of opportunity open, since things are rapidly changing. This is why we've pushed to get this up and going, so the new Board and Council have time to do the tasks at hand.
__________________
Maemo Council Member: May 2012 - November 2012
Hildon Foundation founding member.
Hildon Foundation Board of Directors: March 2013 - Jan 15, 2014
 

The Following User Says Thank You to woody14619 For This Useful Post:
Moderator | Posts: 5,137 | Thanked: 3,983 times | Joined on Oct 2009
#57
@Woody

Regarding this post you referenced in relation to this discussion we had...
That makes things clearer, but I still feel we should enable people to fulfill dual roles "only once" it's looking certain that there won't be enough suitable candidates for Council & Board.
Yet to review the revised by-laws & new posts since here & respond accordingly, hopefully it's still possible to provide feedback next Monday, might be too late IIRC! :-/
*update*
Dug-up one of your earlier posts that mentioned an absolute deadline of October 12th, so *touch wood* next Monday (time permitting) should still be okay for feedback.

http://wiki.maemo.org/Community_Coun...ection_Q4_2012
http://talk.maemo.org/showthread.php...35#post1274735

Last edited by jalyst; 2012-10-01 at 11:06. Reason: Added links to be reviewed later...
 

The Following User Says Thank You to jalyst For This Useful Post:
woody14619's Avatar
Posts: 1,439 | Thanked: 3,160 times | Joined on Dec 2009 @ Rochester, NY
#58
Originally Posted by jalyst View Post
I still feel we should enable people to fulfill dual roles "only once" it's looking certain that there won't be enough suitable candidates for Council & Board.
Considering that nomination for the positions ends on Friday, and there are currently only 2 nominations for Board, and 0 for Council , with a min of 3 required for both... I'd call that looking certain.

Originally Posted by jalyst View Post
Yet to review the revised by-laws & new posts since here & respond accordingly, hopefully it's still possible to provide feedback next Monday, might be too late IIRC! :-/
You may want to hold off then, as I'm going to post a new revision later today that includes several of the concerns brought up here and elsewhere. I will probably do so as a blog post, so a new thread will be created. I'll link it from this thread when/if it pops up.
__________________
Maemo Council Member: May 2012 - November 2012
Hildon Foundation founding member.
Hildon Foundation Board of Directors: March 2013 - Jan 15, 2014
 

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to woody14619 For This Useful Post:
Posts: 536 | Thanked: 399 times | Joined on Jul 2010 @ USA
#59
Woody, thanks for being responsive to questions & maintaining a good informational flow to the community.
 

The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to rotoflex For This Useful Post:
woody14619's Avatar
Posts: 1,439 | Thanked: 3,160 times | Joined on Dec 2009 @ Rochester, NY
#60
As promised, the latest version of the bylaws for review. I've included a PDF and OpenDoc version of the latest version (V5), and a PDF that shows the deltas from V4 to V5 for those that have been following along.

Please comment on these! We need to have this nailed down soon, specifically by October 12th (end of Board elections). Again, these are gziped because of the crazy-small restrictions of document sizes.
Attached Files
File Type: gz Bylaws4to5-delta.pdf.gz (114.9 KB, 43 views)
File Type: gz Bylaws-rev5.odt.gz (15.9 KB, 40 views)
File Type: gz Bylaws-rev5.pdf.gz (113.4 KB, 49 views)
__________________
Maemo Council Member: May 2012 - November 2012
Hildon Foundation founding member.
Hildon Foundation Board of Directors: March 2013 - Jan 15, 2014
 

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to woody14619 For This Useful Post:
Reply

Tags
best wishes, council, whats going on?

Thread Tools

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:45.