Hadar Pedhazur wrote:
We have had _numerous_ discussions (all in email) with two members of
ZEA. We came to an agreement and all seemed perfectly on target, which
is why we began all of the other ZF documents and committee meetings, etc.
Unfortunately, ZEA never delivered a single draft of the proposed
transfer documents, even though they said that the documents already
existed for the Plone trademark transfer.
These are serious claims. I talked to Paul who looked into it and
gave me the following information. Note that, since the negotiations
are finished and the terms are agreed to, we can talk about this with
whomever is interested.
Some quick points:
1) ZEA emailed ZC on Aug 29, twice on Aug 30, Sep 5, and Sep 15.
2) The Sep 15 note reminded ZC of two points:
a. We don't have the paperwork yet. We can't transfer something we
don't have. (Contrary to public statements, the Plone paperwork
hasn't arrived either.)
b. We can't finish the transfer until ZC provides foreign address
information for certain countries. This was discussed in the mails
3) ZEA has well over a hundred manhours over the last 18 months on
this trademark. We are getting no compensation for past, present,
or future work. Yet, ZEA continues to help the process, as the
emails will attest.
4) ZEA gave the contact info for the trademark attorney to ZC,
encouraged ZC to contact her (hasn't happened), and instructed her
These points might not be 100% right, ZEA might have made mistakes,
we're not perfect, the trademark attorney could respond faster, we
could email ZC twice per day, etc.
On a personal note, ZEA is working for free to help ZC improve the
value of a sharelholder asset. ZC might have legitimate complaints
about ZEA's performance. However, public mudslinging does not incent
our pro bono help on the transfer process. As ZEA has stated, ZC can
go directly to the trademark lawyer.
Instead, public mudslinging and constantly threatening the Zope
Foundation could have a dire effect. We are one reporter away from a
"Zope: The Next Mambo?" story.
We should immediately stop using the mailing lists and the Zope
Foundation as negotiation tools for ZC property.
ZEA might have mishandled things, or you might simply believe ZEA
isn't acting in good faith. Let's find an alternate outlet for this.
For example, add someone from ZEA to the advisory board that you
mentioned. If you feel that ZEA isn't acting right, take it to the
advisory board. ZEA gets a chance to respond. If the advisory board
votes against ZEA, ZEA gets publicly thrown off the advisory board.
ZEA has agreed (from the beginning) to hand over the marks at no
financial gain. Once ZC provides the missing information and ZEA gets
the papers, we're probably a few weeks away from wrapping this up.
Any niggles in this are just niggles. The deal is done and there are
no disagreements on the terms. The transfer process, although
complicated, is in progress. Given this, the risk of being "The Next
Mambo" outweighs the perceived benefit from mudslinging.
Matt Hamilton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Netsight Internet Solutions, Ltd. Business Vision on the Internet
http://www.netsight.co.uk +44 (0)117 9090901
Web Design | Zope/Plone Development & Consulting | Co-location | Hosting
Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -