IP-WARS.NET - a forward command post of the IP Wars
create account| Front Page|Mission|Standard Operating Procedures|Operating Instructions(aka FAQ's)|Privacy Policy|Site Stats/Info|Admin Actions|Search
Sections:General|IP|SCO v World |Microsoft|grok*/OSRM|IPW Site Meta|Logbooks|Diaries|Legal Documents|View All Articles

RFC: Incorporating IPW


General News

By ColonelZen, Section IP-wars.net Site Issues
Posted on Mon Sep 12th, 2005 at 15:28:39 EST

This "article" is just excerpts from the discussion about incorporating IPW which occurred in SS IPW Takes a Hit as a means of protecting it to some extent from future attempts at intimidation.

The unanswered question is whether Jeff C would want to turn over this site to such a corporation, but I think the discussion would be worthwhile for him to hear if he has not made up his mind, and of wider interest for any future projects any of us may have in mind.

--------------------

Re: Soft Target? (4.55 / 9) (#28)
by mikey on Sat Sep 10th, 2005 at 23:03:02 EST

Jeff is a private individual with limited resources who is responsible for a family....

...

If we really want to do it right, we should form something like a non-profit so that the personal assets of whoever happens to host it are not at risk.  Either that or it should be set up in a distributed fashion so that risks are spread so far nobody could afford an attempt to take it down like Merkey has.

---------------------

Re: Soft Target? (4.00 / 10) (#30)
by Potential Recruit on Sun Sep 11th, 2005 at 07:57:00 EST

....

    On the subject of your non-profit (presumably corporation) I don't see how that helps. Whoever's suing sues the people behind the corporation. Remember, the problem here isn't fear of the opponent winning, it's having to fight the case. Having a corporation in the way just gives you extra issues to argue in court. It won't stop you getting sued.

---------------------

Re: Soft Target? (4.28 / 7) (#34)
by mikey  on Sun Sep 11th, 2005 at 11:53:35 EST

....

        Creating (a 501 3c?) puts the assets of the non-profit at risk, not the individuals who happen to host the site.  Of course nothing is perfect, a corporate veil can be pierced etc...  I am no expert, but I am almost certain that a non-profit would be in a much better position.  Insurance could be purchased to help defray legal costs, donations or membership dues could be written off for tax purposes, etc... The only thing I am not sure about is how it would effect what kind of speech could be allowed, i.e. non-profits cannot lobby etc...  Again, I am not very knowledgable, but I know that there has to be a better way.  The personal assets of whoever hosts it should not be at risk.

-----------------------

Re: Soft Target? (4.16 / 6) (#43)
by ColonelZen  on Sun Sep 11th, 2005 at 14:12:21 EST

Actually I'm rather amused and bemused by the thought of having not only the worlds first totally  ccl, thus truly open website, but ...

Maybe we should do the worlds first truly open corporation.   All of our notes BOD discussions motions and votes on the corporate website.  The website not just being for reporting of the corporate business but actually being the locale where the decisions, discussions and votes actually happen.

If, as you pointed out, there's a problem here it is that all the liability, but also all the responsibility for the decision process lies with Jeff.

I really, really like the idea of the experiment above.   Capitalizing the corporation, now proposed as a standard LLC (Delaware?) is the first problem - I've said I'm in for a K (at least) if we can get 10k of committments. Others?

Of course before going further, JeffC, if we reach an agreement to do this, would you be willing to transfer IPW to such a corporation?

----------------

Re: Soft Target? (4.50 / 6) (#51)
by ColonelZen  on Sun Sep 11th, 2005 at 16:47:00 EST

...

... as I see it the first order of business is to provide some legal structure with some legal protection for running IPW (again presuming JC would be willing to transfer it.  We can discuss in abstract doing this for another site, but I'm not sure it's worth it.  I am personally invested, by my articles and work  , in IPW).

As I see it the purposes would read something like (legal eagles need to tighten):

   1) To operate and maintain a membership web site or sites for publishing articles and encouraging authorship and publication of articles concerning intellectual property conflicts and concerns, matters peripherally related to intellectual property and such other material as may be of interest to the membership.  

   2) To use the resources of the corporation to protect the right and privilege of publication and discussion by the membership.

   3) To solicit membership and encourage contributions by and for the web site(s) above, and to establish, publish and enforce the rights, privileges and obligations of the membership as per above.

   4) To solicit, accept, and disperse funds by donation, contribution or obtained through commerce or corporate finance in execution of other purposes.

   5) To do any lawful action ... deemed necessary or desirable by the directors or officers of the corporation persuant to the above purposes.

----------------------

Re: Soft Target? (4.00 / 5) (#54)
by br3n on Sun Sep 11th, 2005 at 17:18:40 EST

someone,cant recall who ,said something about 501c? which i thought limited political type postings?
...

-----------------------

Re: Soft Target? (3.75 / 4) (#55)
by mikey on Sun Sep 11th, 2005 at 17:39:33 EST

which i thought limited political type postings?

Which is a very valid concern, we would not want to limit ourselves...

------------------------

Re: Soft Target? (3.66 / 3) (#78)
by Sunny on Sun Sep 11th, 2005 at 23:20:25 EST

someone,cant recall who ,said something about 501c? which i thought limited political type postings?

Would it?  Or would it just stop IPW inc. from taking a political stance?  Wouldn't individuals still be able to express their own views, provided that IPW didn't discriminate (for example, by censoring one particular political view)?

I don't know.  I'm just asking.

-------------------------

Re: Soft Target? (4.00 / 6) (#48)
by heimdal31  on Sun Sep 11th, 2005 at 15:30:40 EST

Unfortunately, my means are not as robust.  I could not go in for $1000 but for a few hundred at most.

I want more details before I put up any money, but I too think it is an interesting experiment.

Can it be set up as a non-profit since the point is not to make profit--and since I'd rather like to keep advertisements off.  (And if we ever do have ads, I think we should only accept them with the understanding that we can make fun of them.)

--------------------------

Re: Soft Target? (4.25 / 4) (#63)
by heimdal31  on Sun Sep 11th, 2005 at 20:30:34 EST

br3n mentioned that being a non-profit prohibits political speech.  She is correct, so I withdraw that suggestion.

I do think that one thing we want to figure out is how to structure it so that it is resistant to damage.

Obviously, I like the general manner that Jeff Causey has administered the site--a light hand and complete openess, even to explaining comments that have been disappeared.

However, I'm thinking more how do we make sure that someone with mega-bucks can't buy it out?  One way that comes to mind is the Green Bay Packard method.  They are one of the few teams that hasn't moved or threatened to move out of their city in order to extort more dole out of the taxpayers.  They way they have been able to do that is because there is no majority ownership--and the ownership is spread amongst a large number of ardent fans who aren't in it for the money.

Thus, I think that we should look for something along those lines:  

   1.  Make sure that it takes a large number of shareholders to create a majority.

   2.  Make sure that the bulk of those shareholders are the same kind of idiots we are--extreme libertarians when it comes to free speech and much more concerned with principal than with money.

I'd also suggest that Jeff Causey should not need to purchase shares.

----------------------------

Re: Soft Target? (3.83 / 6) (#45)
by Napoleon Reddress on Sun Sep 11th, 2005 at 14:34:13 EST

Col Zen, I think you are on the right lines, but the phrase 'putting your money where your mouth is' comes to mind. At $1000 on a $10000 corporation, you place yourself as big enough money to be identified as a mouth to be silenced. I think that this is far better as many small equal holdings, of value €100 or £50 or $100. Of course anyone can put in more, but it is a gift and confers no more ownership, and ideally, ownership should become diluted over time.

As for location, it strikes me that the USA is the most full of IP BS, and hence the worst location. Thinking of the date, and what the protagonist has done over the last 4 years, I am inspired to think it requires some form of limited liability setup in several jurisdictions, with minimal shared ownership, but with maximum coherence of action

< Multiprocessor Software Cooperation Agreement (11 comments) | Investor Commitments (11 comments) >
Display: Sort:
RFC: Incorporating IPW | 119 comments (109 topical, 10 editorial, 1 hidden)
Re: Some thoughts and ideas (4.57 / 7) (#62)
by JCausey (jcausey@ip-wars.net) on Fri Sep 16th, 2005 at 18:33:33 EST
(User Info) http://www.ip-wars.net
Just some miscellaneous thoughts and updates on some research I've done.

501(c)(3) status - after looking over some IRS pubs, I think this may be a possibility if the purpose of the corp is properly framed.  In our case, it would have to be something along the lines of "promoting the education and awareness of intellectual property issues".  One way the corp would do that is by providing a web site for discussion.  Since the web site welcomes all positions, we should not run afoul of the legislative or political activity restrictions.  Depending on the makeup of the corp, some folks may need to include disclaimers on stuff they write indicating it is their own position and not the corp's position.  The flip side of all this is there is a lot of paperwork and administrative stuff to be attended to in order to maintain the 501(c)(3) status.  So, there would have to be some analysis of pros and cons.

Form of the corporation - still looking into this (e.g. inc. or LLC or something else).  Likewise there have been discussions about a location for the corp if it is pursued.

Legal defense funds - maintaining such a fund might be one purpose of the corp if we wanted to expand beyond the IPW walls.  I found some calls for a Bloggers Legal Defense Fund from around December 2004, but it looks like the idea was never picked up.  I also found the Media Bloggers Association that may have some interest to some here.  The problem I consistently run into (the same for me) is the lack of a way for small, independent bloggers to have counsel to fight the run of the mill harassment suit.

Membership - the discussions about who would be members, controlling interests, etc., have been interesting.  I really cannot discern a good way to handle this yet though.

IRC - I think br3n mentioned this as a way to hold a "conference" or "meeting".  I looked into setting up an IRC server as part of the ip-wars.net site, but it would violate the TOS with my host.  I'm not really familiar with IRC, so I'm guessing some other alternatives may be available.  Anyone care to tackle setting up an IPW channel?

Totally OT - This is way off topic, but I've been trying to get an old PC loaded up with Linux to use as a server here at my house.  I've tried FC3, FC4, SuSE 9.3, OpenSUSE 10.0, all to no avail.  Every single one of them goes through the install process fine until I have to insert the second CD.  Then every one of them throws an error indicating they cannot access the CDROM.  I'm thinking of installing a new CD drive (possibly DVD) and see if that works.  Any ideas?

Jeff

  • Re: Some thoughts and ideas by mikey, 09/16/2005 21:10:25 EST (3.83 / 6)
  • Re: Some thoughts and ideas by FrogstarRobot, 09/18/2005 22:01:12 EST (3.80 / 5)
    • Re: Some thoughts and ideas by mikey, 09/19/2005 00:58:14 EST (3.25 / 4)
      • Re: Some thoughts and ideas by Potential Recruit, 09/19/2005 14:23:53 EST (3.66 / 6)
Attacking IPW (4.33 / 6) (#16)
by heimdal31 (heimdal31_ip_warsNO@SPAM.threenorth.com) on Mon Sep 12th, 2005 at 21:46:57 EST
(User Info) http://www.threenorth.com/sco
I suppose that I'm approaching this from a network security standpoint.  Given the different approaches, how would I, as a well-funded attacker, attempt to take the site down.  Let me say, that I like the idea and doing it in the F/OSS tradition of being open about the problems so you can deal with a number of potential ones before they occur.

I'd appreciate if others could add to the list.  I think it is similar to some of the things that we did when deciding how to moderate, what license to use and other policies when first setting it up and wanting to insure that certain things did not happen.

Ways to attack a corporate structure:

  1. Make IPW a living hell to deal with because of the trolls.  (Look what one or two dedicated, unpaid individuals were able to do).  Then, buy out the shares of the top holders.  Voila.  Instant control.

  2. If it is still possible to add new corporate members, then buy up enough shares, distributed amongst enough different people, to kick it over the 3?? shareowners threshold that forces the company public and subject to a slew of additional regulations and accounting issues.  That may take longer, but it will suck funds out of the coporation pretty darn quickly.

  3. Sleepers who eventually begin posting clearly copyrighted material which cause legal attacks from more than one well-funded opponent.

  4. I'm sure I could find a patent or two that the site violates.

  5.  Variation of 1.  Just take it over.  Look what we did to the Yahoo SCOX and CKX boards.  If a large enough group of posters wanted to, they could easily take it over to the point where sharholders may own shares and be paying for it all, but they have no control.  It needn't even be a troll attack.  It could be hijacked for some other legitmate cause that most of us care little about or that most of us will end up on different sides of.  At that point, I can see people perhaps selling their shares in disgust.

I'm repeating here what I said in a comment that ColonelZen quoted, but if we go the corporat route, we need to make it so that we have a large number of shareholders and that it takes a significant subset of those to reach a majority.  I don't know how we do that.  Colonel if you and Dio each toss in a thousand and I toss in a hundred, it will take twenty one of me to get more votes than the two of you.  Now, I happen to think that I'd vote with the two of you on most issues, so when we are talking you and Dio, it doesn't bother me that much, particularly if you and Dio together only represented 20%.  However, if you, Dio and two others were more than 50%, I would worry.

Given that we are unlikely to make money, how do we raise funds after the initial stake is gone?  Will we continually issues shares year after year?  (If so, see problem 2.)  It's not even like we get enough page views that we can sell ads--which I'd hate to see anyway.

Distributed structure attack:

  1.  see 3 above.  Post clear copyright violations.

  2.  see 4 above.  Patent suit against each node.

  3.  likely attacks on any synchronization protocol.  (What happens if I publish simultaneous comments at all nodes?  How do the nodes authenticate their content?  Can I break into that and poison it all?  How do they authenticate passwords?  Can I own one node, leave it alone and get enough info to then impersonate any poster--and with the distributed nature, disproving that it was you that posted could be very difficult.)

  4. Volunteer to host a node and then try some of the tricks in 3.

Other random questions:

Who gets access to the logs?  I'm serious.  I've been fascinated at what I can glean looking at the threenorth logs.  I don't publicize that except maybe a hit or two in an e-mail.  You can't let every shareholder access them, because that would effectively be no privacy whatsoever, which will drive many away.  Someone else suggested not logging IPs at all, but you may need them if you ever get a DDOS attack--or if someone does cross a legal line.

Who makes decisions that may require more than zero ratings?  Jeff has nuked spam posts.  He has removed a few truly obnoxious posts and/or diary.  If you have a copyright violation, you need to react quickly.  Some one or ones will need to be empowered to do that.  Who?  Who watches the watchers?  Can shareholders recind a decision if fifty percent disagree?

How do you count votes, if you are going to have shareholders involved in the day to day running?  I mean, in normal shareholder meetings, you announce the meeting, send out proxies, require a quorum the majority of the quorum carries the day.  If you are talking more than annual meetings, how far in advance must they be announced?  What happens when someone gets disinterested and simply leaves?  What happens if too many do and you can't get a quorum?  (Is that attack number 6?)

I know there are more.  If you're serious, you need to start thinking about these situations and how to answer them, because I don't expect too many people to plop down more than beer money until these and other issues are more clear.

---Tim Rushing

  • Re: Attacking IPW by ColonelZen, 09/12/2005 23:23:30 EST (4.00 / 5)
  • Re: Attacking IPW - site control by ColonelZen, 09/12/2005 23:42:28 EST (4.00 / 6)
  • Re: Attacking IPW by pgk, 09/13/2005 02:35:58 EST (4.00 / 7)
    • Re: Attacking IPW by ColonelZen, 09/13/2005 09:51:42 EST (4.00 / 6)
  • Re: Attacking IPW - Troll problem by ColonelZen, 09/12/2005 22:41:01 EST (3.83 / 6)
  • Re: Attacking IPW - control of ownership by ColonelZen, 09/12/2005 22:59:22 EST (3.83 / 6)
    • Re: Attacking IPW - control of ownership by heimdal31, 09/13/2005 00:00:48 EST (4.00 / 5)
  • Re: Attacking IPW by deepdistrust, 09/13/2005 20:43:45 EST (3.83 / 6)
    • Re: Attacking IPW by codswallet, 09/14/2005 00:17:21 EST (3.85 / 7)
      • Re: Attacking IPW by heimdal31, 09/14/2005 21:47:03 EST (3.80 / 5)
        • Re: Attacking IPW by codswallet, 09/15/2005 09:33:52 EST (4.16 / 6)
      • Re: Attacking IPW by deepdistrust, 09/15/2005 00:27:43 EST (3.50 / 6)
        • Re: Attacking IPW by ColonelZen, 09/15/2005 09:08:30 EST (3.85 / 7)
        • Re: Attacking IPW by codswallet, 09/15/2005 10:54:51 EST (3.83 / 6)
          • Re: Attacking IPW by deepdistrust, 09/15/2005 14:51:50 EST (3.85 / 7)
            • Re: Attacking IPW by codswallet, 09/16/2005 18:43:10 EST (3.71 / 7)
Re: purpose, requirements (4.20 / 5) (#68)
by JCausey (jcausey@ip-wars.net) on Wed Sep 21st, 2005 at 10:35:28 EST
(User Info) http://www.ip-wars.net
OK, I've gone back through the RFC and most of the comments to try to discern what the requirements would be for a corporation.  Some of the points I discerned:
  • protection against intimidation
  • protection against frivolous lawsuits
  • protection of personal property
  • promote distribution/mirrors/forking of the primary IPW web site
  • purchase insurance
  • enable a means for donations to be tax-free
  • provide a model of an "open" corporation
  • operate and maintain a member web site
  • prevent buy-outs
First of all, if anyone thinks the list is incomplete or one of these should be removed, please make your case as a reply to this.

As I mentioned in another post, one of the basic questions I have is whether the corp (or whatever entity may be created) exists merely to operate the IPW site or is there a larger purpose of which IPW is merely one tool.  I would suggest the latter as the better choice to provide greater flexibility in many ways.  Perhaps I'll put a poll up on this question, but in the meantime, let's hear comments.

OK, before I go into more stuff, I better stop here and listen first to help guide the way.

Jeff

  • Re: purpose, requirements by JCausey, 09/21/2005 10:47:35 EST (4.00 / 5)
    • Re: purpose, requirements by ColonelZen, 09/21/2005 18:08:36 EST (4.00 / 5)
      • Re: purpose, requirements by JCausey, 09/22/2005 09:37:15 EST (3.80 / 5)
        • Re: purpose, requirements by ColonelZen, 09/22/2005 19:50:59 EST (4.00 / 4)
          • Re: purpose, requirements by JCausey, 09/23/2005 08:34:16 EST (4.00 / 4)
      • Re: purpose, requirements by ColonelZen, 09/21/2005 18:55:43 EST (3.25 / 4)
  • Re: purpose, requirements by mikey, 09/22/2005 17:29:54 EST (4.00 / 4)
    • Re: purpose, requirements by ColonelZen, 09/22/2005 22:51:01 EST (4.00 / 5)
  • Re: purpose, requirements by JCausey, 09/23/2005 08:42:52 EST (4.00 / 4)
    • Re: purpose, requirements by ColonelZen, 09/23/2005 12:09:23 EST (4.00 / 4)
      • Re: purpose, requirements by mikey, 09/24/2005 00:53:45 EST (4.25 / 4)
    • Re: purpose, requirements by mikey, 09/24/2005 00:49:18 EST (3.75 / 4)
  • Re: duh! by JCausey, 09/23/2005 12:03:53 EST (4.00 / 5)
    • Re: duh! by ColonelZen, 09/23/2005 12:33:30 EST (4.00 / 4)
    • Re: duh! by br3n, 09/25/2005 16:46:04 EST (3.33 / 3)
  • Re: purpose, requirements by ColonelZen, 09/21/2005 17:58:29 EST (3.75 / 4)
  • Re: name? by JCausey, 09/23/2005 11:55:33 EST (3.20 / 5)
    • Re: name? by ColonelZen, 09/23/2005 13:46:47 EST (3.75 / 4)
      • Re: name? by mikey, 09/24/2005 10:33:08 EST (3.66 / 3)
        • Re: name? by ColonelZen, 09/24/2005 11:43:17 EST (4.00 / 3)
    • Re: name? by mikey, 09/24/2005 10:32:36 EST (3.33 / 3)
Re: RFC: Incorporating IPW (4.00 / 6) (#4)
by JCausey (jcausey@ip-wars.net) on Mon Sep 12th, 2005 at 11:28:19 EST
(User Info) http://www.ip-wars.net
Just to let everyone know, I would consider any potential solutions at this point that will help us all avoid a similar situation in the future.  That would include the potential sale of the site or some other type of change in ownership.  Let's keep exploring options and figure out what is the best course for the future.  I'm open to anything at this point.

Jeff

  • Re: RFC: Incorporating IPW by ColonelZen, 09/12/2005 12:28:48 EST (4.00 / 5)
    • Re: RFC: Incorporating IPW by nono2sco, 09/12/2005 13:19:57 EST (3.83 / 6)
      • Re: RFC: Incorporating IPW by ColonelZen, 09/12/2005 13:46:16 EST (4.00 / 6)
      • Re: RFC: Incorporating IPW by mikey, 09/12/2005 14:12:16 EST (4.00 / 5)
Thoughts (4.00 / 5) (#22)
by heimdal31 (heimdal31_ip_warsNO@SPAM.threenorth.com) on Tue Sep 13th, 2005 at 00:11:46 EST
(User Info) http://www.threenorth.com/sco
First of all, Colonel.  Great replies to my earlier questions.  I'm headin gup to bed soon, so don't have time to reply in the detail I'd like.

Instead of buying it from Jeff C.  If he is willing, what if we capitalized the corporation and then bought it from him for enough shares to make him a significant shareholder?  He may not have the money that others do, but I think he should have some say in how the site is run.

What if we made a similar offer to Warmcat to add Yahoeuvre--perhaps even unbreaking it so that I can get at that damned hole in Yahoo in the Summer of 2004?

---Tim Rushing

  • Re: Thoughts by mikey, 09/13/2005 02:19:01 EST (4.20 / 5)
    • Re: Thoughts by ColonelZen, 09/13/2005 09:30:01 EST (4.20 / 5)
    • Re: Thoughts - income by ColonelZen, 09/13/2005 09:43:14 EST (4.20 / 5)
  • Re: Thoughts by FrogstarRobot, 09/13/2005 18:26:06 EST (4.00 / 6)
    • Re: Thoughts by ColonelZen, 09/13/2005 19:08:02 EST (4.00 / 4)
      • Re: Thoughts by FrogstarRobot, 09/13/2005 20:27:33 EST (3.40 / 5)
  • Re: Thoughts by ColonelZen, 09/13/2005 00:46:07 EST (3.80 / 5)
By law, BOD org discussion (4.00 / 5) (#39)
by ColonelZen (tzellers lieth within pobox of thy kingdom com) on Tue Sep 13th, 2005 at 18:23:09 EST
(User Info)

In response to NR's Investor Committment comment, http://www.ip-wars.net/comments/2005/9/13/11528/9363/3

We haven't discussed bylaws in detail yet, so this is just preliminary, but -

I pretty much agree with what Tim suggested earlier - BOD decisions by majority vote of BOD (whole BOD whether whole BOD or just a quorum attends a meeting, I.E if we have  11 BOD and 9 sit at a meeting, it still takes 6 to pass a measure).   Questions can be put to stockholders at stockholder meetings - this is pretty much law and there ownership does take on meaning, but most policy most of the time would be decided BOD.

As I see it anyone holding or representing by proxy x% or more must be seated as BOD if he chooses.   Some of the stock is set aside an proxied via non-stockholder-membership by some yet to be determined formula, and while the BOD is below a certain size the BOD gets to nominate and seat new members.

Any BOD not attending a meeting (remember our "meetings" are online) for 3 months regardless of holdings is stricken (if holding/rep more than x%, simply needs to present to Secy to be re "seated"),  majority of BOD or stockholders can remove a non-beneficial-owner BOD. If BOD grows above a certain size the BOD is required to displace a BOD who is not a holder (need to keep the BOD size small enough that a quorum on reasonable notice is feasible).

x should probably be about 5%,  Max BOD size should probably be 21 (thoretically, though never happen, there could be 20 required seated BOD's at 5%) and BOD should nominate and seat a new member if BOD falls below 7.  Or x could be 10% and max of say 12, min 5.

This is just a starting framework for discussion.    Other ideas invited.

-- TWZ


  • Re: By law, BOD org discussion by Napoleon Reddress, 09/14/2005 15:35:32 EST (4.00 / 5)
    • Re: By law, BOD org discussion by ColonelZen, 09/14/2005 22:33:46 EST (4.00 / 5)
      • Re: By law, BOD org discussion by Napoleon Reddress, 09/15/2005 15:29:57 EST (4.00 / 8)
        • Re: By law, BOD org discussion by ColonelZen, 09/15/2005 20:57:30 EST (4.14 / 7)
Re: Draft Bylaws (4.00 / 4) (#91)
by JCausey (jcausey@ip-wars.net) on Fri Sep 30th, 2005 at 08:48:45 EST
(User Info) http://www.ip-wars.net
Below is a draft set of bylaws for a new entity. It was heavily influenced by the Wikimedia Foundation, though I made a few changes here and there. As always, comments, suggestions, etc., are welcome as I think some further changes are needed, but need help figuring out what needs to be done.

Jeff

_____________________________________ Bylaws of the ________________

ARTICLE I: NAME
This organization shall be known as the _________________ (the Foundation). The registered agent and registered office will be determined by a resolution of the Board of Trustees. The main web site of the Foundation shall be __________________________.

ARTICLE II: STATEMENT OF PURPOSE
The general purpose and objectives of the Foundation shall be the following: ______________ Foundation is dedicated to the development and maintenance of online free, open content articles, discusssions, collections of documents, information, and other informational databases that will be distributed free of charge to the public under a free documentation license such as the Creative Commons License or similar licensing scheme. The Foundation is committed to modeling the principals of "open source" in a variety of settings and for multiple purposes. The goals of the foundation are to encourage the further growth and development of open content, analysis of intellectual property issues, awareness and to provide the full contents of those projects to the public free of charge. In addition to managing the already developed open content web site named ip-wars.net, the Foundation may pursue projects, programs and actions to encourage free speech by the general public in forums other than those directly managed by the Foundation.

ARTICLE III: MEMBERSHIP
Section 1.

Within the Foundation, there shall be the following membership classifications: Contributing Active, Volunteer Active, Life, Sustaining, and Honorary.

A. CONTRIBUTING ACTIVE MEMBERSHIP:
Active membership in this Foundation shall be limited to volunteers who have contributed to any ____________ project prior to the election ballot request deadline after their application for membership and payment of annual dues. All active members shall have the right to vote in this Foundation at any membership vote for the two Contributing Active Member Representatives to the Board of Trustees.

B. VOLUNTEER ACTIVE MEMBERSHIP:
This membership shall consist of all persons interested in supporting the activities of the Foundation who have contributed under a user name to any ____________ project prior to the election ballot request deadline. The only other qualification for membership shall be the creation of a user account on some _______________ project. Volunteer Active Members shall have all the privileges of active members except for voting for the two Contributing Active Member Representatives. Each Volunteer Active Member and each Contributing Active Member shall have the right to vote for the two Volunteer User Representatives to the Board of Trustees.

C. LIFE MEMBERSHIP:
In recognition of his role as Founder of the IP-Wars.net web site, Jeffrey G. Causey is granted life membership. Life members shall have all the privileges of contributing active members except they shall be exempt from paying dues and shall not be required to make any contributions to any _____________ project. [Note: If anyone has a problem with this, please speak up - won't hurt my feelings.]

D. SUSTAINING MEMBER:
Individuals who contribute substantial amounts shall be designated as Sustaining Members and shall have all the privileges of active members. The qualifications for sustaining membership contributions shall be established by the Board of Trustees. Such members shall be listed (anonymously if requested) in some prominent place on the main on-line site of the Foundation.

E. HONORARY MEMBERSHIP:
An Honorary membership may be bestowed upon any person or organization who has made a significant contribution to the Foundation upon a recommendation by the Board of Trustees and approval by the general membership at the General Meeting of the Foundation. Honorary members shall not be required to pay dues and shall not be eligible to hold office or vote.

Section 2. USER ACCOUNTS OF MEMBERS.
All applicants for contributing or volunteer active membership shall maintain a user account on one or several ______________ projects (i.e. ip-wars.net web site, etc.), complete and sign the form of application provided by the Foundation on it's web site and submit the application the Secretary along with payment of the year's membership dues, if applicable, through such web site or by mail. Such application shall include an agreement by the applicant to abide by the Foundation's Code of Ethics, submission standards and other policies as are time to time adopted or modified by the Board of Trustees.

Section 3. ANNUAL DUES.
Annual dues for any and all relevant classes of membership shall be due and payable as established by the Board of Trustees. The amount of dues and renewal periods will be established by the Board of Trustees by resolution of a majority of the Board.

Section 4. TERMINATION OF MEMBERSHIP.
Membership in the Foundation can be terminated based upon any of the following:

Section 4.1. FAILURE TO PAY DUES.
When an Active Contributing or Sustaining or Sustaining/Corporate member shall be in default of dues for a period of sixty (60) days from the beginning of the period for which such dues become payable, s/he or such corporate member becomes delinquent and ceases to be entitled to any of the benefits of such class of membership by the Foundation until such dues are paid.

Section 4.2. WRITTEN RESIGNATION.
Any member may resign from the Foundation by submitting a written resignation to the Secretary. Such resignation shall be effective as of the date received by the Foundation, unless said resignation specifies another date. The Board at it's sole discretion may maintain or remove any such user's account from any of its projects upon such resignation.

Section 4.3. REMOVAL FOR CAUSE.
Members of any classification may be removed from all membership categories for cause by a four-fifths vote of the Board of Trustees; such decision shall be final and unappealable. For any cause, other than non-payment of dues, removal shall occur only after the member against whomever the complaint was made, has been advised of the complaint and has been given reasonable opportunity for defense before a committee to be formed and convened only should the occasion arise. The Board of Trustees, at it's sole discretion, may maintain or remove any such user's account from any of its projects upon such removal for cause which may also be for successive membership terms (i.e. numbers of years); such removal shall mean said individual shall not be allowed to contribute to any Foundation project until said time is completed. This removal process shall not be the same as the process of temporary (long or short term) suspension of member privileges on any Foundation project.

Section 4.4. SUSPENSION.
Independent of the power of Removal for Cause, the Board of Trustees shall be empowered to order suspension of membership or the suspension of particular or specific user privileges at its sole discretion of any member upon receipt of a verified complaint of misconduct; such suspension shall be a short or long term temporary measure in connection with any mediation or arbitration procedure or procedures.

ARTICLE IV: THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES
Section 1. POWERS.

The powers of the corporation shall be exercised, its properties controlled, and its affairs conducted by a Board of Trustees to be comprised initially of seven trustees. All trustees must be active (contributing or volunteer) or life members of the Foundation.

Section 2. SELECTION.
The initial Trustees shall be elected by a majority vote of the Trustees and shall serve until their successors are elected and qualified. Selection shall be in the following manner:

Section 2.1. MEMBER REPRESENTATIVES.
Within Ninety Days of the initial adoption of these Bylaws and then annually thereafter two Trustees shall be selected from the Contributing Active Membership by a vote of Contributing Active Members. Within Ninety Days of the initial adoption of these Bylaws and one Trustee shall be selected from the Volunteer Active Membership by vote of Contributing and Volunteer Active Members. On an annual basis thereafter, two trustees shall be selected from the Volunteer Active Membership by vote of Contributing and Volunteer Active Members. The Board of Trustees shall determine the dates, rules and regulation of the voting procedures; they shall appoint two Inspectors of the Election from the active membership of the Foundation to oversee the election procedures who shall report and certify the results within thirty days of any vote. The deadline for the issuance of ballots to eligible members shall be no more than thirty days prior to any election date as set by the Board of Trustees.

Section 2.2. OTHER INITIAL TRUSTEES.
The remaining initial Trustees shall be Jeffrey G. Causey, xxxxxxxxxxxxx, yyyyyyyyyyy, and zzzzzzzzzzzzz.

Section. 2.3. REPLACEMENT OF BOARD MEMBERS.
Should a Trustee resign, become incapacitated or otherwise be unable to serve the remaining Trustees shall appoint an interim representative if such Trustee was a Member Representative until such time as a new election can be held to fill such office at the next annual election. If not, the remaining Trustees may elect a replacement. In such case should there be a tie vote the Chair shall cast the deciding ballot.

Section 3. DELEGATION AND EXPENSES.
Any action required or permitted to be taken by the Board of Trustees under these Bylaws or any provision of law may be delegated by the Board to the Chair or any committee of the Board. Trustees may not be compensated for their roles as Trustees. They may be allowed expenses, by resolution of the Board, for attending meetings, if necessary. No Trustee shall be employed or otherwise receive compensation from the Foundation for their duties as Trustees.

Section 4. MEETINGS.
Meetings of the Board of Trustees may be scheduled at such times and at such places as the Trustees deem appropriate and shall be conducted at least annually. A quorum shall consist of a least four directors. The Chair may call a special meeting of the Trustees for any purpose upon notice being given at least ten days in advance of the meeting. Meetings may be held by electronic means such as telephone or chat as long as all Trustees are able to participate fully in any discussions with all the other members of the Board. Any meeting that is adjourned may be continued without the presence of a quorum of the Board as long as all the Trustees are given reasonable notice of the time and place such adjournment shall resume. A resolution signed by all the Trustees shall have the same force as if it were passed at a duly called meeting of the Board of Trustees. A majority of the Board of Trustees shall constitute a quorum at any meeting of the corporation.

ARTICLE V: OFFICERS AND DUTIES
Section 1. COMPOSITION OF BOARD.

The Board of Trustees shall elect from among its members a Chair, Vice Chair, Secretary and Treasurer. These officers shall be elected for one year terms of office by majority vote of the Board and may be re-elected at the expiration of their term. No individual may serve more than three consecutive years in a given officer position. Any officer may be removed at any time for cause or without cause by an affirmative vote of a majority of the whole Board of Trustees.

Section 2. CHAIR.
The Chair shall be the chief elected officer of the corporation. It shall be the duty of the Chair to preside at all regular and special meetings of the corporation. The Chair shall have general supervision of the affairs of the corporation and shall make reports to the Board of Trustees and the members at regular and special meetings and other times as necessary to keep them informed of corporation activities. The Chair shall appoint committees, regular or special, as required from time to time except the Disciplinary Board which shall be appointed by vote of the whole Board of Trustees.

Section 3. VICE CHAIR.
The Vice Chair shall perform the duties and have the powers of the Chair when the Chair is absent or unable to perform his duties. Other duties of the Vice Chair may be designated by the Board of Trustees or the Chair.

Section 4. SECRETARY.
The Secretary shall keep accurate records of all corporation meetings; ensure that all notices are duly given in accordance with the provisions of these Bylaws or as required by law; maintain corporate records and the seal of the corporation; receive monies for the corporation, issue checks on those monies, and keep and render as required true accounting thereof; perform all duties of the office of the Secretary and such other duties as may be assigned by the Chair or the Board of Trustees. The Secretary shall make a fidelity bond with such surety and in such penalty as the Board of Trustees shall require, if any.

Section 5. TREASURER.
The Treasurer shall review the financial operations of the organization and advise with the Secretary on financial matters; make financial reports to the Board of Trustees at regular and special meetings; and perform such other duties as assigned by the Chair or the Board of Trustees.

ARTICLE VI: AMENDMENTS
These bylaws may be altered, amended or repealed and new Bylaws may be adopted by a majority of the entire Board of Trustees at any regular meeting or special meeting, provided that at least ten days written notice is given of intention to alter, amend or repeal or to adopt new Bylaws at such meeting.

ARTICLE VII: DEDICATION OF ASSETS
The property of this corporation is irrevocably dedicated to charitable purposes and no part of the net income or assets of this corporation shall ever inure to the benefit of any director, officer or members thereof or to the benefit of any private individual.

ARTICLE VIII: DISTRIBUTION OF ASSETS
Upon the dissolution or winding-up of this corporation, its assets remaining after payment, or provision for payment, of all debts and liabilities of the corporation shall be distributed to a nonprofit fund, foundation, or corporation which is organized and operated exclusively for charitable purposes and which has established its tax exempt status under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, or corresponding provisions of subsequent federal tax laws.

ARTICLE XIX: MISCELLANEOUS
Section 1. SEAL.

The corporation seal shall be circular in form and shall contain the name of the corporation, the year of its creation and the words, "XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX". Said seal may be used by causing it or a facsimile thereof to be impressed or affixed or reproduced otherwise.

Section 2. FISCAL YEAR AND REVIEW.
The administrative and fiscal years of the corporation shall be January 1 - December 31 of each year. The accounts of the corporation shall be reviewed annually by a Certified Public Accountant. [Note: Probably looking at $2,000 - $3,000 for this. May want to put in some qualifier or just delete to add back at a later time.]

Section 3. NOTICES.
Whenever any notice is required by the Bylaws, it shall be deemed to be sufficient if mailed via first class mail to the last known address of the intended recipient or to the last known email address of the member. Such notice may be waived in writing by the intended recipient.

Section 4. VOTING MEANS.
Voting on all matters, including the election of Trustees and officers, may be conducted by mail, electronic mail, facsimile transmission, chat software, video conferencing, or other similar verifiable means. Proxy voting shall not be allowed.

Section 5. RESERVE POWER.
The Board of Trustees shall be empowered to make any and all regulations, rules, policies, user agreements, terms of use, and other such decisions as may be necessary for the continued functioning of the Foundation not inconsistent with these bylaws.

Duly adopted in __________________ this _______ day of ____________ 200_.

  • Re: Draft Bylaws by mikey, 10/02/2005 11:55:00 EST (none / 2)
    • Re: Draft Bylaws by JCausey, 10/02/2005 22:47:40 EST (4.00 / 3)
      • Re: Draft Bylaws by ColonelZen, 10/03/2005 18:22:05 EST (4.00 / 3)
        • Re: Draft Bylaws by mikey, 10/03/2005 19:43:38 EST (none / 2)
        • Re: Draft Bylaws by br3n, 10/03/2005 19:46:14 EST (none / 2)
      • Re: Draft Bylaws by mikey, 10/03/2005 20:09:33 EST (none / 2)
        • Re: Draft Bylaws by mikey, 10/03/2005 20:41:50 EST (none / 2)
  • Gentoo Foundation by mikey, 10/04/2005 10:55:15 EST (none / 1)
  • Wikimedia Foundation Bylaws by mikey, 10/04/2005 11:04:11 EST (none / 1)
  • Who'd 'a thunk it? by mikey, 10/04/2005 11:25:48 EST (none / 2)
Re: To Do List (4.00 / 3) (#92)
by JCausey (jcausey@ip-wars.net) on Fri Sep 30th, 2005 at 08:55:33 EST
(User Info) http://www.ip-wars.net
Just some assorted thoughts on proceeding with this concept.

  1. Need to finish cleaning up bylaws and articles of incorporation.

  2. Identify other three "initial" Board of Trustee members (assuming that section of bylaws not changed).  How to do this?  I do think these folks and the elected BoT members can be "usernames" instead of real names to protect anonymity if that is an issue for anyone.

  3. Decide on a name.

  4. File for incorporation.

  5. Setup web site for the corp. Where?  How? [I don't mind doing it as part of this site or on my server.  Wondering best choice to develop site - wiki? blog? cms? handcode? something else?]

  6. Develop budget.

  7. Decide how to "meet"? IRC? Some other chat?  I think I could deploy some web based chat if needed.

  8. Start working on election of additional BoT members.

  9. Start soliciting membership and fundraising efforts.

That should get us going.

Jeff

  • Re: To Do List by mikey, 10/02/2005 16:43:59 EST (none / 2)
    • Re: To Do List by ColonelZen, 10/02/2005 18:41:51 EST (4.00 / 3)
      • Re: To Do List by mikey, 10/03/2005 20:08:39 EST (none / 2)
        • Re: To Do List by ColonelZen, 10/03/2005 22:23:20 EST (4.00 / 3)
          • Re: To Do List by heurtley, 10/04/2005 08:03:36 EST (3.75 / 4)
            • Re: To Do List by JCausey, 10/04/2005 08:53:37 EST (4.00 / 3)
          • Re: To Do List by mikey, 10/04/2005 09:54:55 EST (none / 2)
            • Re: To Do List by JCausey, 10/04/2005 10:15:01 EST (3.66 / 3)
              • Re: To Do List by mikey, 10/04/2005 10:34:31 EST (none / 1)
                • Re: To Do List by mikey, 10/04/2005 10:36:09 EST (none / 0)
    • Re: To Do List by JCausey, 10/02/2005 22:37:25 EST (4.00 / 3)
      • Re: To Do List by mikey, 10/03/2005 17:57:28 EST (none / 2)
      • Re: To Do List by mikey, 10/03/2005 17:58:15 EST (none / 2)
Re: RFC: Incorporating IPW (3.80 / 5) (#27)
by ruidh on Tue Sep 13th, 2005 at 09:10:51 EST
(User Info)
So maybe we should change Potential Recruit to Potential Investor?

We shouldn't discard the 501(c)3 idea too quickly. Yes, political positions have implications for non-profit status, but those implications are for the official acts of the corporation. It shouldn't affect a poster from making a political statement on the board.

I sanyone keeping track of the Potential Investors? You should probably put me on the list.

 

  • Re: RFC: Incorporating IPW by ColonelZen, 09/13/2005 10:50:32 EST (4.00 / 4)
  • Re: RFC: Incorporating IPW by Sunny, 09/14/2005 00:58:27 EST (4.00 / 5)
  • Re: RFC: Incorporating IPW by ColonelZen, 09/13/2005 11:02:56 EST (3.50 / 4)
Freenet? (3.75 / 4) (#15)
by mikey (mikey at badpenguins dot com) on Mon Sep 12th, 2005 at 15:04:10 EST
(User Info) http://www.ip-wars.net
Would freenet be a viable option?

http://freenet.sourceforge.net/index.php?page=faq


---
DISCLAIMER:
IANAL, may have no idea what the heck I am talking about, yadda yadda yadda.

  • Re: Freenet? by FrogstarRobot, 09/13/2005 18:03:33 EST (3.80 / 5)
    • Re: Freenet? by mikey, 09/13/2005 18:13:36 EST (4.00 / 4)
Investor Commitment logbook (3.75 / 4) (#34)
by ColonelZen (tzellers lieth within pobox of thy kingdom com) on Tue Sep 13th, 2005 at 11:10:54 EST
(User Info)
http://www.ip-wars.net/story/2005/9/13/11528/9363

-- TWZ

Re: RFC: Incorporating IPW (3.75 / 4) (#35)
by deepdistrust (deepdistrustspamwelcome@yahoo.com) on Tue Sep 13th, 2005 at 14:26:14 EST
(User Info)
Can for-profit companies accept donations? Some people may just want to donate money without acquiring any ownership and (the admittedly minimal) liability.

  • Re: RFC: Incorporating IPW by ColonelZen, 09/13/2005 17:21:06 EST (3.60 / 5)
Re: RFC: Incorporating IPW (3.75 / 4) (#60)
by codswallet on Thu Sep 15th, 2005 at 20:01:39 EST
(User Info)
I found this slightly disturbing ruling about personal jurisdiction and the internet.

    *  Sidney Blumenthal, et al. v. Matt Drudge and America Online, Inc.
      992 F. Supp. 44 (D.D.C. April 22, 1998)

      The court denied defendant Drudge's motion to dismiss for want of personal jurisdiction. Drudge's maintenance of an interactive website, on which his Report appeared, which permitted users to subscribe to the Drudge report via e-mail, and solicited contributions from forum residents to defray publication costs, combined with other contacts with Washington D.C., including a visit to D.C. to promote the report, and mail and phone contacts to obtain gossip, made the exercise of jurisdiction over him appropriate.)

It's on this very useful site - a library of internet defamation cases.

I don't think contributions are enough by themselves, but maybe Jeff should say he won't take any from residents of Utah.


IRC channel? (3.50 / 4) (#26)
by br3n on Tue Sep 13th, 2005 at 08:36:47 EST
(User Info)
if we are worried about the further exposure for right now,we could meet in an irc channel?this way we could at least get basic ideas submitted without worry?
the logs of discussion could be posted so it is still available and open discussion.
br3n
  • Re: IRC channel? by ColonelZen, 09/13/2005 10:58:34 EST (3.75 / 4)
    • Re: IRC channel? by br3n, 09/13/2005 20:55:12 EST (3.33 / 3)
Re: RFC: Incorporating IPW (3.40 / 5) (#1)
by br3n on Mon Sep 12th, 2005 at 08:51:53 EST
(User Info)
liability.that is 1st priority?
spreading it around so that vulnerability is more shared is great.
but first we should identify what we are vulnerable to?

br3n
  • Re: RFC: Incorporating IPW by mikey, 09/12/2005 10:21:27 EST (4.20 / 5)
    • Re: RFC: Incorporating IPW by JCausey, 09/12/2005 11:23:41 EST (4.00 / 6)
Re: Draft - Art of Inc (none / 2) (#90)
by JCausey (jcausey@ip-wars.net) on Fri Sep 30th, 2005 at 08:12:28 EST
(User Info) http://www.ip-wars.net
Below is a draft Articles of Incorporation.  After doing some research, I have to agree Delaware would probably be the best choice (though Nevada is also considered a pretty good state for inc.'s).  I have not yet looked at what would be necessary outside the U.S., but this should get things started.

Jeff

_______________
State of Delaware
Certificate of Incorporation
A Non-Stock Corporation

First:  The name of the corporation is ___________.

Second:  Its Registered Office in the State of Delaware is to be located at ______(street), in the City of _______ County of _______ ZIP Code ______.  The name of the registered agent is _________.[Note: I found someone to do this for $50 annually.]

Third:  The purposes for which this organization is organized are exclusively religious, charitable, scientific, literary and educational within the meaning of section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 or the corresponding provisions of any future United States Internal Revenue law and to engage in any lawful act of activity for which corporations may be organized under the General Corporation Law of Delaware.  This corporation shall be a non-profit corporation.  More specifically, the corporation is dedicated to the development and maintenance of on-line free, open content articles, discussions, collections of documents, information, and other informational databases that will be distributed free of charge to the public under a free documentation license such as the Creative Commons License or similar licensing scheme.  The corporation is committed to modeling the principals of "open source" in a variety of settings and for multiple purposes.

Fourth:  The corporation shall not have any corporate stock.

Fifth:  Upon the dissolution of the corporation, assets shall be distributed for one or more exempt purposes within the meaning of section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, or corresponding section of any future Federal tax code, or shall be disposed of by a court of competent jurisdiction of the county in which the principal office of the organization is then located, exclusively for such purposes.

Sixth:  No part of the net income or assets of this corporation shall ever inure to the benefit of any director, officer or members thereof or to the benefit of any private individual.

Seventh:  The conditions of membership shall be those stated in the bylaws of the corporation.

Eighth:  The name and address of the incorporator are as follows:[Note: Could be anyone, but since my info is already public, I figure I'm a good choice. :-) ]

Jeffrey G. Causey
1905 Elmwood Dr.
Graham, NC 27253

I, the undersigned, for the purpose of forming a corporation under the laws of the State of Delaware, do make, file and record this certificate, and do certify that the facts herein stated are true, and I have accordingly hereunto set my hand this ______ day of _____, A.D. ___.

    By:[sig]
Incorporator

    Name:    Jeffrey G. Causey

Bye bye spambot (none / 1) (#116)
by Potential Recruit on Mon Nov 27th, 2006 at 10:12:44 EST
This used to be a spambot post that is flooding the site. Due to volume, I had to resort to this while I work to block access by these bots. My apologies - thanks for your patience.

Jeff

Bye bye spambot (none / 0) (#118)
by Potential Recruit on Tue Nov 28th, 2006 at 12:49:19 EST
This used to be a spambot post that is flooding the site. Due to volume, I had to resort to this while I work to block access by these bots. My apologies - thanks for your patience.

Jeff

Bye bye spambot (none / 0) (#119)
by Potential Recruit on Tue Nov 28th, 2006 at 14:27:45 EST
This used to be a spambot post that is flooding the site. Due to volume, I had to resort to this while I work to block access by these bots. My apologies - thanks for your patience.

Jeff

RFC: Incorporating IPW | 119 comments (109 topical, 10 editorial, 1 hidden)
Display: Sort:

Links

Firefox 2

Use OpenOffice.org

Add to Technorati Favorites

Join EFF Today

ToTehMoon web site button

~ Merkey v The Internet et al Docs
~ Yahoeuvre
~ tuxrocks.com (SCO cases legal docs)
~ scofacts.org
~ eagle.petrofsky.org
~ Zen's Den
~ Yahoo SCOX Message Board
~ Lamlaw
~ Microsoft Watch
~ Groklaw
~ Korgwal - a Groklaw mirror
~ nosoftwarepatents.com
~ Flame Warriors
~ SCOXE Wars
~ Get your Merkey Number here!
~ Digital Law Online

Recent Comments

Breaking News and External Article Comments
General News – General Articles
by ColonelZen, January 5
58 comments
» Re: Which company is the evil one ? – ColonelZen, Dec 16
» TSG announces $100 million cash... – sphealey, Feb 14
» SCO Lifeboat List from Stats_for_all – AncientBrit, May 6

Eagle Loses Appeals
General News – General Articles
by JCausey, December 15
1 comment
» Re: Eagle Loses Appeals – br3n, Jan 7

The Chinese Room Revisited, Thoughts on...
General News – Diary
by ColonelZen, November 24
1 comment
» Re: The Chinese Room Revisited,... – ColonelZen, Nov 24

How to Transition a Windows Shop to Linux
General News – General Articles
by JCausey, November 21
3 comments
» Re: How to Transition a Windows Shop to... – ColonelZen, Nov 22
» Re: How to Transition a Windows Shop to... – JCausey, Nov 23
» Re: How to Transition a Windows Shop to... – ColonelZen, Nov 23

Advocacy
General News – Diary
by br3n, October 29
3 comments
» Re: Advocacy – br3n, Nov 2
» Re: Advocacy – ColonelZen, Nov 2
» Re: Advocacy – br3n, Nov 4

Very Bad News for Darl and Ralph
SCO v The World – Diary
by ColonelZen, October 13
7 comments
» Re: OT advocacy – br3n, Oct 26
» Re: OT advocacy – JCausey, Oct 28
» Re: OT advocacy – br3n, Oct 29

Some SCOX Financial Analysis
SCO v The World – SCO Related Articles
by JCausey, September 21
13 comments
» Re: Some SCOX Financial Analysis – br3n, Oct 3
» Re: Some SCOX Financial Analysis – ColonelZen, Oct 3
» Re: Some SCOX Financial Analysis – br3n, Oct 6

Open Source in Education - Opening Doors
General News – General Articles
by JCausey, September 28
1 comment
» Re: Open Source in Education - Opening... – br3n, Sep 29

An IPOWER ful experience
General News – Diary
by ColonelZen, September 25
6 comments
» IPOWER SysAdmin Doesn't Do Weekends!! – ColonelZen, Sep 29
» Re: An IPOWER ful experience – ColonelZen, Sep 29
» Re: An IPOWER ful experience – ColonelZen, Sep 29

Learning C#
Microsoft – Diary
by ColonelZen, September 23
1 comment
» Re: Learning C# – ColonelZen, Sep 23

Comment search...
If funded to 10k or more and we agree on charter, should IPW incorporate?
~ Yes 100%
~ No 0%
~ We'll never get the committments 0%
~ What's the point? We're doomed. Free speech is done. 0%

Votes: 2
Results | Other Polls
-->

Recent Diaries

SCO has a Potential and Credible BILLION Dollar Liability
by ColonelZen - March 15

The Chinese Room Revisited, Thoughts on Consciousness
by ColonelZen - November 24
1 comment


Advocacy
by br3n - October 29
3 comments


An IPOWER ful experience
by ColonelZen - September 25
6 comments


Learning C#
by ColonelZen - September 23
1 comment


Getting ruby DBI for Mysql and Postgresql working on FC 6
by ColonelZen - March 7

Declaration of Linus Torvalds
by nedu - February 13
1 comment


Declaration of M. Douglas McIlroy
by nedu - February 12
6 comments


Declaration of Ulrich Drepper
by nedu - February 11
1 comment


Declaration of K. Y. Srinivasan
by nedu - February 11


More Diaries...

Login

Make a new account

Username:
Password:

Older Stories

Monday May 28th
Why SCO Does Not Own the Unix Copyrights
   (0 comments)

Thursday April 5th
It Can Really Happen - Eagle Broadband Delisting from AMEX
   (5 comments)

Monday March 12th
OpenOffice.org Sends Open Letter to Dell
   (0 comments)

Tuesday March 6th
Preliminary Order in Prohibition
   (2 comments)

Monday January 15th
[Linux-ia64] optimizing __copy_user
   (12 comments)

Older Stories...

Related Links

~ SS IPW Takes a Hit
~ More on General News
~ Also by ColonelZen

SourceForge Logo Powered by Scoop

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies or owners.
Comments, articles and logbooks are owned by the Poster. By posting on the ip-wars.net web site, all posters grant a license to ip-wars.net to publish the content and release it pursuant to the Creative Commons License that covers the rest of the site. For more details, please check out the Standard Operating Procedures. Also, please read the Privacy Policy for the site. Finally, DO NOT send e-mail to the site owner (Jeff Causey) unless you have read and agree to the terms regarding e-mail included in the Standard Operating Procedures.
Everything else © 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 ip-wars.net and Jeffrey G. Causey and is licensed under a
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.