Re: [open-regulatory-compliance] Stewards, open source projects etc

[Greg Wallace <greg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks.

This is interesting and important.

At the same time, receiving something of value from a non-profit in exchange for money is not entirely novel. Various 501(c)3 organizations charge fees for Standards and any number of 501(c)6 orgs offer benefits to Corporate Members. Further, the FreeBSD Foundation, a 501(c)3, undertakes sponsored development from time to time in areas that are of particular interest to the sponsoring companies.

The way the FreeBSD Foundation is conceiving of Attestations at the moment relates to the US SSDF regime. Any Corporate Partner that donates at any one of our three Partnership levels is eligible to receive the SSDF Attestation, in addition to other opportunities for community engagement and promoting their support of FreeBSD, such as discounts to attend events, ads in the FreeBSD Journal, etc. This page provides details. https://freebsdfoundation.org/our-donors/freebsd-foundation-partnership-program/

I wonder if it comes down mostly to a question of semantics - e.g. is it a "donation" or something else?

Greg  

On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 11:05 AM Daniel Thompson-Yvetot via open-regulatory-compliance <open-regulatory-compliance@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I want to point out, that at least in Germany, if not other parts of europe, a donation must not have a quid pro quo, aka a donation is a pure gesture without expectation of a service being rendered or a product being delivered. The moment you „get something in return for a donation“, the nature of your expenditure loses its „ideal“ status and you are participating in a market type activity.

On Tue, 06 Aug 2024 at 15:53, Salve J. Nilsen via open-regulatory-compliance <open-regulatory-compliance@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Tue, 6 Aug 2024, Tobie Langel via open-regulatory-compliance wrote:

> I'm wondering at what point (if any) the model of payment (donation) for
> attestation turns an open source stewart into a manufacturer.

This is actually spelled out in Recital 18.

    "[…] For instance, the mere fact that an open-source software product
    with digital elements receives financial support from manufacturers or
    that manufacturers contribute to the development of such a product
    should not in itself determine that the activity is of commercial
    nature. […]"

(Recitals 16-21 are all relevant for this discussion, btw.)


- Salve

--
#!/usr/bin/env perl
sub AUTOLOAD{$AUTOLOAD=~/.*::(\d+)/;seek(DATA,$1,0);print# Salve Joshua Nilsen
getc DATA}$"="'};&{'";@_=unpack("C*",unpack("u*",':50,$'.#    <sjn@xxxxxx>
'3!=0"59,6!`%%P\0!1)46%!F.Q`%01,`'."\n"));eval "&{'@_'}";  __END__ is near! :)
_______________________________________________
open-regulatory-compliance mailing list
open-regulatory-compliance@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://accounts.eclipse.org

_______________________________________________
open-regulatory-compliance mailing list
open-regulatory-compliance@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://accounts.eclipse.org

--

Greg Wallace

Director of Partnerships & Research

M +1 919-247-3165

Schedule a meeting

Get your FreeBSD Gear