On 8 February 2011 16:36, BRM <bm_witness@yahoo.com> wrote:
----- Original Message ----
From: Ian Lynch <ianrlynch@gmail.com>
On 8 February 2011 11:34, Florian Effenberger <
floeff@documentfoundation.org
wrote:
Hi,
thanks for your contributions, great to see things moving! :-)
Well, I think opening an US bank account is problematic at least from
the
time perspective, but maybe also from a legal PoV - our association
might
not be eligible to do so, as we are accredited in Germany and have
special
tax rules applied here.
Jonathan Aquilina wrote on 2011-02-08 10.18:
Is the TDF an NGO. If its based in the EU the organization can
possibly
get a lot of funding from the EU itself.
IIRC, the EU only funds existing entities, i.e. they will only fund us
when
the Foundation itself exists.
That is correct. One avenue would be to create a company limited by
guarantee or Community Interest Company in the UK - costs about 50 Euro
and
then use that to raise money to set up the German Foundation after say a
year and just transfer any surplus money. Note that for EU grants you
have
to submit accounts so probably you need a years operation to generate
those.
So the earlier the better. Of course there are some advantages to having
two
sister companies since they could be partners in an EU project. That
could
even be a deliberate strategy. You could then get money for study visits
and
mobilities between them. Organise a preparatory meeting at one and you
have
the potential for people from other countries to get paid by their NA to
attend the meeting. You could even set up a thematic network with
funding
for partners to travel meet and discuss things.
Why resort to deception and Microsoft-esque tactics to promote LO?
Why is it every time anyone thinks a little bit laterally, paranoia sets in
in relation to Microsoft :-)
This is nothing to do with deception, its about a simple strategy to work
through national bureaucratic systems which have significant differences in
order to arrive at a perfectly legal and transparent outcome to meet the
needs of the community.
That is all having two companies owned by the same collective would do.
Not at all, many collectives have different companies and interests. It is
perfectly legal and reasonable to do so. You might have a company focused on
R&D and another on sales. There are common shareholdings across many large
companies and many that are organised in devolved ways.
So while it may be expedient to setup one company for a short term to raise
money
in order to convert to the other in the future (no problem), if that is
done
then the first
should be shut down upon conversion.
No problem at all with that but just like there are different native
language projects as part of the OOo community that operate with high
degrees of autonomy, there is no moral or legal reason not to have national
or regional foundations associated with LO. It really is just a matter of
selecting a preferred method of administration to the best meet the desired
outcomes of the project.
Everything you mention, aside from the deceptive partnerships, can be done
with
one entity.
I resent the inference that I am being deceptive. That is YOUR
interpretation of something that is perfectly transparent and perfectly
reasonable.
Ben
--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+help@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
--
Ian
Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications
The Schools ITQ
www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940
You have received this email from the following company: The Learning
Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79
8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales.
--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+help@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Context
Re: [tdf-discuss] Foundation Fundraising · Benjamin Horst
Privacy Policy |
Impressum (Legal Info) |
Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (
MPLv2).
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our
trademark policy.