[Reposted with previously missed corrections.] 1. SOFTWARE FREEDOM CONSERVANCY. I have been communicating with people at the Software Freedom Conservancy, and the Software Freedom Law Center and I am anticipating some answers to questions which I did not obtain a week ago at Software Freedom Day co-hosted by the Software Freedom Law Center in New York. I have asked about about what advantage the Conservancy has specifically and also about asset lock and project withdrawal procedures. The Conservancy has no voting or membership fee and project affiliation does not extend to voting on conservancy policies. The Conservancy is run by many of the same people who run the Software Freedom Law Center who have as old and as trustworthy a standing in supporting free software as anyone as well as past involvement with running FSF. Conservancy projects run themselves and determine their own voting procedures. The Conservancy provides the non-profit status and other legal necessities so that the project can accept donations, etc. 2. WIKI ORGANISATION. Some of this information is in the text file but not in the table in the Koha wiki. I will try to reorganise the information so that is not missing from either representation and make it all readily findable in the wiki. Both pages should be in the 'en' language namespace to facilitate translation and linked to a common page on the foundation. 3. SOFTWARE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST. I do see a problem which may affect all US based choices for an interim home for a Koha foundation including both the Conservancy and SPI. I only just noticed and do not know if it also affects the Conservancy. The SPI howto for managing an associated project has no consideration for transferring assets to a non-US organisation once it would be possible for a Koha foundation to become autonomous, http://www.spi-inc.org/treasurer/associated-project-howto.html . "Your Liaison may decide that your project is quitting SPI at any time. Any assets and money held by SPI for your project may be transferred to the 501(c)3 US non-profit of your choice, or simply held until expended." Perhaps that is a legal constraint in the US for 501(c)3 organisations. The small long term risk of being a litigation victim in the US, especially over improperly broad software patents, may make the US a poor long term choice in the absence of changes from the courts or Congress. I am not suggesting that the US would be a poor interim choice unless there is a problem about freely or easily choosing a home country for the general project foundation long term. MJ, would you please try to obtain an answer from SPI about what possibility there is for transferring assets to a non-US organisation when a project would leave SPI? If there is no easy way around the issue, that would be a con for SPI and perhaps also a con for the Conservancy if it is a difficulty of US law. Thomas Dukleth Agogme 109 E 9th Street, 3D New York, NY 10003 USA http://www.agogme.com +1 212-674-3783 [...]