[ANN] Bitcoin Foundation

[shad0wbitz]

Hey, that means you have his real name and adress on file. 

Another LOLz....

[Troll Toll]

100% in support of the foundation.

[ElectricMucus]

Satoshi is a very involved member of the bitcoin community, I think he's Casascius.
I know I will never be able to prove that, and people will ignore/ridicule my assessment, nevertheless I believe it  

[greyhawk]

Satoshi is a very involved member of the bitcoin community, I think he's Casascius.
I know I will never be able to prove that, and people will ignore/ridicule my assessment, nevertheless I believe it  

It makes a lot of sense actually.

[EhVedadoOAnonimato]

I'ts not difficult to list someone as a founding member even if they "disappeared"

It's not difficult, it's just a lie. As the name "Bitcoin Foundation" itself, since you're not the foundation of Bitcoin.

[kjj]

I'm guessing the satoshi client or whatever people call it these days will now be copyrighted under the bitcoin Foundation? The Foundation is essentially the vehicle for the development of that client?

Bitcoin Foundation != dev team

While I hope the Bitcoin Foundation will address critical immediate needs -- like paying Gavin to work on bitcoin -- fiddling with the copyrights does not seem within the claimed Linux Foundation model.  The Linux kernel is copyrighted by the individual authors, not by the Linux Foundation.  It seems logical the code would stay the same.

After all, the code is not just the dev team, even...  it is every contributor.  And every code contributor wrote has written more than a couple lines of code has a copyright claim.

Full disclosure:  yes, I joined the foundation as a lifetime member.

This is a pretty common misunderstanding of copyright law.  Copyright can't be taken, it can only be given.  Every fragment of every line of code has an author, and that author holds the copyright on that part (or their employer, for example, if they've made such an agreement).  Some developers could assign their copyright to the foundation if they wanted to, but the foundation can't just take it.  It also isn't available for a vote, for example, if the devs held a vote on assigning the rights to the foundation, their vote wouldn't be binding on anyone.

[kjj]

I suggest two seats just for mining, with voting decided in the coinbase rather than creating a third category of membership.

Having two miners seats will give opportunity to two biggest pools to become even bigger, this is clearly a step in wrong direction.

Huh?

[axus]

Isn't liberty great?  Gavin can make a Bitcoin Foundation, and people can join, or not, as serves their interests.

[Maged]

Give me an example how a fat ass target foundation will cause us to lose everything?

Imagine USA declares bitcoin illegal and asks the foundation based in this country to leak all the users joined database.

In that case, the Bitcoin Foundation is the best thing we could have asked for in such a time. You see, if that ever happens, the Bitcoin Foundation will have the power and connections in the Bitcoin world to reign holy hell on any country that tries that. Without such an organizational structure in place, we would be squabbling for months over who and how we would counter that move. Want proof? See every bitcoin lawsuit ever made.

[ageisp0lis]

Rejoice! Hoorah!

[Yankee (BitInstant)]

I'ts not difficult to list someone as a founding member even if they "disappeared"

It's not difficult, it's just a lie. As the name "Bitcoin Foundation" itself, since you're not the foundation of Bitcoin.

Whats a lie?

Satoshi is a member of the foundation because he is the creator of Bitcoin.

Just because he "disappeared" doesn't mean he can't be member in absentee.

In fact, the bylaws outline that if Satoshi returns how he will claim his seat.

[scomil]

Good job. Great idea. I have complete trust in the board with it's current composition and it feels good that we'll have a dedicated core team of funded developers that can focus full time on building this economy. Looking forward to see this develop.

Roger & Mark - We're all grateful for your donations.

I have signed up for 1 years membership. (Signup should be smoother - email confirmation, QR code etc)

Best of luck.

[Serith]

I suggest two seats just for mining, with voting decided in the coinbase rather than creating a third category of membership.

Having two miners seats will give opportunity to two biggest pools to become even bigger, this is clearly a step in wrong direction.

Huh?

Members that would occupy mining seats will protect interest of biggest mining pools, e.g. they will fight promotion of p2pool.

[boonies4u]

I'ts not difficult to list someone as a founding member even if they "disappeared"

It's not difficult, it's just a lie. As the name "Bitcoin Foundation" itself, since you're not the foundation of Bitcoin.

Whats a lie?

Satoshi is a member of the foundation because he is the creator of Bitcoin.

Just because he "disappeared" doesn't mean he can't be member in absentee.

In fact, the bylaws outline that if Satoshi returns how he will claim his seat.

Is this wishful thinking? Or covering your asses?

I'm surprised you put him in the bylaws, let alone saved a seat for him. Unless your guys know something we don't?  

[jgarzik]

I'm guessing the satoshi client or whatever people call it these days will now be copyrighted under the bitcoin Foundation? The Foundation is essentially the vehicle for the development of that client?

Bitcoin Foundation != dev team

While I hope the Bitcoin Foundation will address critical immediate needs -- like paying Gavin to work on bitcoin -- fiddling with the copyrights does not seem within the claimed Linux Foundation model.  The Linux kernel is copyrighted by the individual authors, not by the Linux Foundation.  It seems logical the code would stay the same.

After all, the code is not just the dev team, even...  it is every contributor.  And every code contributor wrote has written more than a couple lines of code has a copyright claim.

Full disclosure:  yes, I joined the foundation as a lifetime member.

This is a pretty common misunderstanding of copyright law.  Copyright can't be taken, it can only be given.  Every fragment of every line of code has an author, and that author holds the copyright on that part (or their employer, for example, if they've made such an agreement).  Some developers could assign their copyright to the foundation if they wanted to, but the foundation can't just take it.  It also isn't available for a vote, for example, if the devs held a vote on assigning the rights to the foundation, their vote wouldn't be binding on anyone.

1) My post never claimed that it was possible for copyright to be "taken"

2) Existing practice and precedent on copyright is that just a line or two (i.e. one-line bug fix) might not be copyrightable.   i.e. lawyers continue to disagree, but he-copyrights-just-that-one-line is not taken very seriously even by those lawyers who are paid to defend copyright.

[kiba]

Members that would occupy mining seats will protect interest of biggest mining pools, e.g. they will fight promotion of p2pool.

Individuals miners have more power than the pool operators. They can switch to whatever pools they want and the pool operators can't stop them.

[theymos]

If they invite you, would you accept being part of it?

Maybe, but I'm not really qualified. I'm only a 21-year-old college student.

I suggest two seats just for mining, with voting decided in the coinbase rather than creating a third category of membership.

I disagree strongly with this. Miners perform work for the network, but their interests are not really important. Every miner can be replaced if someone figures out how to do mining more efficiently, and this is good.

[Yankee (BitInstant)]

I'ts not difficult to list someone as a founding member even if they "disappeared"

It's not difficult, it's just a lie. As the name "Bitcoin Foundation" itself, since you're not the foundation of Bitcoin.

Whats a lie?

Satoshi is a member of the foundation because he is the creator of Bitcoin.

Just because he "disappeared" doesn't mean he can't be member in absentee.

In fact, the bylaws outline that if Satoshi returns how he will claim his seat.

Is this wishful thinking? Or covering your asses?

I'm surprised you put him in the bylaws, let alone saved a seat for him. Unless your guys know something we don't?  

You can see for youself when the bylaws are posted in a few days.

We just felt Satoshi needed to be the founder of the foundation and since he is missing, this was the best we can do.

Hopefully if he resurfaces in the future, he can identify himself and continue his work using the foundation.

[Graet]

I suggest two seats just for mining, with voting decided in the coinbase rather than creating a third category of membership.

Having two miners seats will give opportunity to two biggest pools to become even bigger, this is clearly a step in wrong direction.

Huh?

Members that would occupy mining seats will protect interest of biggest mining pools, e.g. they will fight promotion of p2pool.

huh?
Is it the foundations goal to promote p2pool or Bitcoin?
most of the devs already support p2pool
I don't see your point
and who said a p2pool rep couldn't be a "pools/miners" rep...
I actually recommended p2pool to someone the other day - and I'm a pool operator!!!!!!

can we just keep to reality please?

It might come as a huge surprise to most some people but pool ops aren't all evil or even bad...

[greyhawk]

I suggest two seats just for mining, with voting decided in the coinbase rather than creating a third category of membership.

Having two miners seats will give opportunity to two biggest pools to become even bigger, this is clearly a step in wrong direction.

Huh?

Members that would occupy mining seats will protect interest of biggest mining pools, e.g. they will fight promotion of p2pool.

huh?
Is it the foundations goal to promote p2pool or Bitcoin?
most of the devs already support p2pool
I don't see your point
and who said a p2pool rep couldn't be a "pools/miners" rep...
I actually recommended p2pool to someone the other day - and I'm a pool operator!!!!!!

can we just keep to reality please?

It might come as a huge surprise to most some people but pool ops aren't all evil or even bad...

As someone who organizes and centralizes things, you're "government" in the eyes of the eternally paranoid. That makes you evil automatically.