Re: [board-discuss] How is TDC compelled to keep the user first?

Simon Phipps wrote: > Dennis wrote: > > So basical TDC is getting a monopoly on many system, hence the Cannoical > > example is really perfect. > > > > I still disagree. TDC is getting temporary agency to act on TDF's behalf > doing something TDF's board recognises it is very poor at executing.

Re: [board-discuss] How is TDC compelled to keep the user first?

On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 10:57 AM Dennis Roczek wrote: > Hi Simon, > Am 02.03.2020 um 11:02 schrieb Simon Phipps: > > On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 4:32 AM Brett Cornwall wrote: > >> I believe that Canonical is related here because, like TDC, the proposal >> appears to be that a for-profit entity be

Re: [board-discuss] How is TDC compelled to keep the user first?

Hi Simon, Am 02.03.2020 um 11:02 schrieb Simon Phipps: > On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 4:32 AM Brett Cornwall > wrote: > > I believe that Canonical is related here because, like TDC, the > proposal > appears to be that a for-profit entity be given exclusive rights to

Re: [board-discuss] How is TDC compelled to keep the user first?

It seems to me that TDF hasn't been efficient in fighting against unauthorized use of the brand. The app stores are full of "liberoffices". Why not doing this by TDC? On 2 March 2020 11:02:16 CET, Simon Phipps wrote: > license is exclusive *only* *in the app > stores*, and that is because TDF

Re: [board-discuss] How is TDC compelled to keep the user first?

On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 4:32 AM Brett Cornwall wrote: > I believe that Canonical is related here because, like TDC, the proposal > appears to be that a for-profit entity be given exclusive rights to a > trademark to a supposed community-owned product. Like TDC, Canonical's > founding idealized

Re: [board-discuss] How is TDC compelled to keep the user first?

On 2020-03-01 20:32, Brett Cornwall wrote: I believe that Canonical is related here because, like TDC, the proposal appears to be that a for-profit entity be given exclusive rights to a trademark to a supposed community-owned product. Like TDC, Canonical's founding idealized Shuttleworth's

Re: [board-discuss] How is TDC compelled to keep the user first?

On 2020-02-28 15:51, Michael Stahl wrote: On 28.02.20 15:04, Brett Cornwall wrote: Other Free Software projects have had for-profit entities created underneath the stewardship of a non-profit; Mozilla Corporation and Canonical are two living examples. Sacrifices to user empowerment are

Re: [board-discuss] How is TDC compelled to keep the user first?

Hi Brett! On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 2:05 PM Brett Cornwall wrote: > > Other Free Software projects have had for-profit entities created > underneath the stewardship of a non-profit; Mozilla Corporation and > Canonical are two living examples. Sacrifices to user empowerment are often > made at

Re: [board-discuss] How is TDC compelled to keep the user first?

On 28.02.20 15:04, Brett Cornwall wrote: Other Free Software projects have had for-profit entities created underneath the stewardship of a non-profit; Mozilla Corporation and Canonical are two living examples. Sacrifices to user empowerment are off-topic, but: how is Canonical related to

Re: [board-discuss] How is TDC compelled to keep the user first?

Hi Brett, First thank you for your questions; cogent, lucid, well articulated & challenging :-) On 28/02/2020 14:04, Brett Cornwall wrote: > Other Free Software projects have had for-profit entities created > underneath the stewardship of a non-profit; Mozilla Corporation and > Canonical

[board-discuss] How is TDC compelled to keep the user first?

Other Free Software projects have had for-profit entities created underneath the stewardship of a non-profit; Mozilla Corporation and Canonical are two living examples. Sacrifices to user empowerment are often made at Mozilla Corporation (e.g. Pocket integration, advertising partnerships to