[Koha] Users and developers (was KUDOS - ALA Proposed Agenda)
cnighswonger at foundations.edu
Thu Jan 21 07:57:57 NZDT 2010
2010/1/20 Jim Minges <jminges at nekls.org>
> The Koha community has struggled with the problem that it does not have, in
> the U.S. or worldwide a legal entity that can take action, seek funding,
> register trademarks, etc. for the good of the community. Well, in order to
> do that we need to move forward and get KUDOS recognized by the IRS as a
> nonprofit corporation.
What I understood as the purpose of KUDOS did *not* include "registering
trademarks, etc. for the good of the community." I think the community has
expressed its will to have HTL do that on its behalf for the time being.
> This is not rocket science and does not require a CPA or attorney, but I
> think we need to move forward on it. The bylaws can be changed at any time
> as desired, but we have to have initial bylaws ASAP in order to file the
> application with the IRS.
Perhaps I misunderstood an email sent earlier by David to imply that there
might be some issues regarding satisfying the IRS requirements for 501.c.3.
If there are no issues, then obviously there is no need to seek advice.
> There was extensive discussion at the ALA KUDOS meeting about the
> importance of NOT excluding developers. The bylaws were revised to include
> any installation of KOHA, which certainly could include a developer who has
> installed the software. There was general agreement that conflict of
> interest issues could be dealt with through the conflict of interest policy,
> and that KUDOS was in general an organization with institutional membership
> (both users and developers). I do know that the committee that wrote the
> bylaws and those at the meeting that hashed out revisions were not in any
> regard exclusionary.
> If KUDOS is going to be taken seriously, we need to move forward with the
> incorporation and sort out the philosophical debates and incorporate them
> into bylaws revisions later if needed.
I suspect that whether KUDOS is "taken seriously" or not will depend largely
on how it is perceived by the Koha community. In the current environment,
being perceived as exclusive or hostile is not a good thing. I believe that
it was the exclusiveness of the original by-laws that triggered the
responses/suggestions/what-ever-you-call-them. Remembering the law of
inertia, I would also say that the potential for major changes in the basic
philosophical presuppositions which underpinned the founding of any
organization are highly improbable. So it is a good idea to have them run
through good, healthy discussion *before* the fact.
> Let's take a deep breath, and get moving.
Yes. Just let's be sure it is movement in the right direction.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Koha