Hi Eyal, hi all,
I have very good reason to believe that this document was prepared with the intention of changing our statutes, purely on the basis of creating as strong a legal precedent as possible for a different legal interpretation. This new legal interpretation would be fundamentally contrary to the founders’ intentions as set out in the statutes, i.e. the objectives of the foundation. In my strong opinion, based on facts, this vote, which creates a legal precedent, confirmed by uninformed trustees, board and MC members, is a huge step in this very bad direction.
Without legal examination, but based on facts, I am convinced that removing FLOSS from our statutes, as very possibly covered by the this vote, has a deterrent effect, as it clearly appears to have real legal consequences, which are serious negative consequences for the sustainability of LibreOffice development, for our community, for TDF and for the whole FLOSS society. A local government, a charity, enterprises, including FLOSS-committed development companies or a committed free software activist, moreover, none of our trustees would no longer be safe if they wanted to use LibreOffice in accordance with FLOSS principles, because they would face a real (and unfortunately now real) legal threat from the foundation, from supervisory authorities, the German government, or even a well-intentioned or malicious actor. The possible legal situation and its deterrent effect precludes LibreOffice from becoming successful, competitive FLOSS software and likely also from being considered free software at all.
TDF is a respected member of the free software community. As soon as it abandons the FLOSS principles and uses or allows to use its new principles against the FLOSS community (for which the new legal documents would provide all the tools likely), it will become a pariah. That’s what I meant when I wrote that the foundation would lose its FLOSS status.
Best regards,
László