<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 12:53 PM, <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:quim.gil@nokia.com">quim.gil@nokia.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="im"><br>
> 3) Get a permanent licence grant for <a href="http://maemo.org" target="_blank">maemo.org</a> to ship Nokia binaries<br>
> (e.g. flasher, firmware) and use them in the build process (SDKs in<br>
> autobuilder and COBS). This would have practical advantage and<br>
> requires formalising something permanently which is already happening.<br>
<br>
</div>The current setup works in this sense, right? What are the actual concerns or risks?<br>
<br>
A legal entity can only make a formal agreement with another legal entity. That was/is the case of the KDE Free Qt Foundation, which seems to be a source of inspiration of this proposal - <a href="http://www.kde.org/community/whatiskde/kdefreeqtfoundation.php" target="_blank">http://www.kde.org/community/whatiskde/kdefreeqtfoundation.php</a><br>
<br>
"<a href="http://maemo.org" target="_blank">maemo.org</a>" is just an Internet domain (owned by Nokia). The Maemo community is not a legal entity.<br>
<div class="im"></div><br><br></blockquote></div>You can have a "copyleft" type license that is not with another legal entity. Also, what is the agreement with <a href="http://apps.formeego.org">apps.formeego.org</a> for Nokia binaries? Are they are a legal entity?<br>
<br>Please also read the logs for the two community OBS meetings. The current working presumption is that there will be a separate legal entity for the community OBS. <br><br>Rob<br>