Subject:
|
Re: Who are 'ldraw.org'? (was: Parts license)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Fri, 22 Sep 2000 20:27:42 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2049 times
|
| |
|
|
"Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message
news:G1Awuz.JpB@lugnet.com...
> I would be the last to suggest more structure than is absolutely needed.
> However, a page from how the internet task forces organise may be • instructive.
> They have this problem because they create standards (via member • contribution)
> which get copyrighted and which people license... seem similar?
>
> IIRC a number of them have charters and have "executive committees" which • are
> elected and which make decisions. The criterion (there's only one) to
> participate in election of the committee is to be able to vote via the
> internet.
>
> Can we do that? Have a few people set up an organizing committee, nominate
> themselves to run things, and then have an election to ratify matters by
> approving their committeeship? We'd be doing it merely for the sake of • form.
> But there would then be a defined structure. (another alternative is to • just
> have the key people "enshrined" as the org and leave it at that, but that
> leaves out transitions and successions.)
>
> As it is now, the license may be a futile exercise without a rights • granting
> body behind it. It (the license) is a good thing to have around so we • ought to
> determine how best to get the body to exist with a minimum of fuss and
bother.
Yup.
> Rather than starting from scratch, if this sounds right, we ought to go • borrow
> some ITF charter and modify it. (mostly by simplifying it)
I did a search for 'internet task force' and found all kinds of government
agencies and activist groups. Then I thought, and went to povray.org - they
seem to be similar enough. But no information can be found about their
group. Perhaps we should contact them and inquire about their structure?
BTW - I used Google to search with ;-)
> ++Lar (who doesn't consider himself in ldraw.org under most definitions, • but
> does under the one that Steve gave that included everyone who's ever voted • on
> parts. Who ALSO isn't keen on structure or regulation except where it's
> absolutely needed)
We still need to define this well. I don't know how exactly to structure
this body of people, or how to address who to include and who not to
include. By someone's observation, two groups of people - a larger 'LCAD
Community' and a more exclusive 'ldraw.org group' would probably be
appropriate. Of course, all suggestions are welcome. I'll participate
where I feel fit, but I won't attempt to moderate such a discussion - I
don't have the time, knowledge, patience, or authority to do such. And
we're all in this together.
--
Tim Courtney - tim@zacktron.com
http://www.ldraw.org - Centralized LDraw Resources
http://www.zacktron.com - Zacktron Alliance
ICQ: 23951114
AIM: TimCourtne
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Who are 'ldraw.org'? (was: Parts license)
|
| Bog. This particular question is very thorny and very important to get right. NELUG stumbled over "who is in NELUG" a while back. And they're not trying to grant rights to anyone that need to survive their discorporation! US copyright and IP law in (...) (26 years ago, 22-Sep-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
73 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
