[Cryptech Core] info about commons conservancy

[Leif Johansson]

On 2018-10-04 18:06, Peter Stuge wrote:
> Stephen Farrell wrote:
>>> and
>>> it seems that a sufficiently large part of this core group fears
>>> intellectual property problems with a "Radically Open BSD License."
>>
>> But I don't see how you get to that last conclusion.
> 
> It seems to be the case.
> 
> Neither proposed organization focuses on managing funds, the Commons
> Conservancy can explicitly not hold any funds. The remaining function
> is intellectual property rights management, and part of the core group
> seems to feel that Commons Conservancy provides some insurance.
> 
> I can understand fear of copyright profiteers and other intellectual
> property problems - such as within Linux in past years - but those
> problems can not arise when being out of compliance is impossible.
> 

Thats not entirely true. We can still get sued over ... just about
anything really.

> That's partly why CrypTech chose that "Radically Open BSD License" -
> to preempt compliance problems.
> 
> 
>> is there some remaining issue that we need to tackle before going
>> ahead with the commons conservancy thing?
> 
> I maintain that CrypTech should not go ahead with that.
> 
> My question about the practical purpose of IPR management for a BSD
> licensed project remains unanswered.

I worry about patent lawsuits. There are lots of patents in hw
security space.


> 
> "It's common" may be appealing but is unconvincing, and benefits for
> CrypTech seem minimal at best.
> 
> To me it makes no sense compared to a simple structure with which the
> project is more flexible and more independent.

I find that I have to remind you of the fact that our current host
wants us gone this year. The combination Commons Conservancy and
NLNet foundation provide a home for our money and a way to do
contracts regardless of what other services they might provide.

Having a company in germany means we have to contract for legal
and admin services. Without the benefit of scale this would raise
our overhead beyond where we can afford to keep paying developers.

Unless you have other options this discussion is getting very
repetitive..

	Cheers Leif