Slash Boxes

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Saturday January 23 2016, @06:18PM   Printer-friendly
from the we-stay-bought dept.

Matthew Garrett reports

The Linux Foundation is an industry organisation dedicated to promoting, protecting and standardising Linux and open source software. The majority of its board is chosen by the member companies: 10 by platinum members (platinum membership costs $500,000 a year), 3 by gold members (gold membership costs $100,000 a year), and 1 by silver members (silver membership costs between $5,000 and $20,000 a year, depending on company size).

Up until recently, individual members ($99 a year) could also elect two board members, allowing for community perspectives to be represented at the board level. As of [January 18], this is no longer true.

The by-laws were amended to drop the clause that permitted individual members to elect any directors. Section 3.3(a) now says that no affiliate members may be involved in the election of directors, and section 5.3(d) still permits at-large directors but does not require them[2]. The old version of the bylaws are here--the only non-whitespace differences are in sections 3.3(a) and 5.3(d).

These changes all happened shortly after Karen Sandler announced that she planned to stand for the Linux Foundation board during a presentation last September [YouTube]. A short time later, the "Individual membership" program was quietly renamed to the "Individual supporter" program and the promised benefit of being allowed to stand for and participate in board elections was dropped (compare the old page to the new one). Karen is the executive director of the Software Freedom Conservancy, an organisation involved in the vitally important work of GPL enforcement.

Roy Schestowitz at TechRights entitled his coverage
The Linux Foundation Has Become Like a Corporate Think Tank; Microsoft Influence Included

[Our extensive coverage of malfeasance at the European Patent Office] has prevented us from covering as much about the Linux Foundation as we used to, including payments from Microsoft, services to Microsoft, and abandonment of GPL enforcement efforts because GPL enforcers went after a Microsoft executives-run VMware.

Several of the places that covered this remarked about the extremely quiet nature of the process.

Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by Marand on Sunday January 24 2016, @06:05AM

    by Marand (1081) on Sunday January 24 2016, @06:05AM (#293828) Journal

    "Midget" has been used for ages to denote someone who is simply much smaller than the average human.

    "Dwarf" is someone who is small but who additionally has body parts that are noticeably out of proportion compared to most folks.

    The collective politically correct term is "Little People".

    Of the three, I think I'd prefer to be called a dwarf if I were short enough for any to apply. It brings to mind images of badass short folk with a love of strong alcohol, while the others sound more like the munchkins in Oz.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 3, Funny) by deimtee on Sunday January 24 2016, @06:46AM

    by deimtee (3272) on Sunday January 24 2016, @06:46AM (#293837) Journal

    You can be a dwarf if you want. If anybody says you are too tall just tell the heightist bastard to stop discriminating against you.

    (r.i.p. pterry, you are missed)

    No problem is insoluble, but at Ksp = 2.943×10−25 Mercury Sulphide comes close.