Hi everyone,

Thanks again for your thoughtful feedback! I'm really delighted to see that we're making concrete steps on this. It's encouraging how the discussion is shaping up.

Peter, I really appreciate the list of topics you suggested. I'll take those pointers and add them to the suggested template for proposals on the wiki, and I'll also try to apply them to the proposals I've already added there.

Regarding the financial and administrative impact of setting up an EU legal entity: from my experience with setting up a (very) small Dutch Stichting (much smaller than Eclipse or even the XSF, without a bank account yet, but with international board members), it was quite doable. Costs were low enough that I was comfortable covering them out of pocket, so I'm hopeful that the impact could be much less than what you described. I do not doubt that we can easily make things very expensive, but maybe we can safely do without many of the expensive bits.

Alex, I see your point, and it reminds me that, no matter which country we choose, we'll always need to rely on and trust local representatives to steer things correctly. In that sense, the move itself doesn't fundamentally change the situation (as we currently already depend mostly on one person for this, too). The main difference might be language accessibility and available guidance: this could favor a country where English is an official language for legal matters, or where authorities provide key resources in English, even if it's not the primary language for legal documents.

On the suggestion of working without a legal entity: I do have some concern specifically around intellectual property. How would IP be handled in that scenario?

As an aside, if we do pursue any kind of migration, do we need to coordinate with Cisco regarding management of the Jabber trademark agreement currently held by the XSF? That's something we may want to clarify early on to avoid surprises.

Kind regards,

  Guus



On Wed, Mar 4, 2026 at 12:19 PM Alexander Gnauck <gnauck@gmail.com> wrote:
Am 04.03.26 um 03:54 schrieb Peter Saint-Andre:
> (4) which roles within the EU org could be filled by volunteers (and who
> is volunteering??) and which roles need to be outsourced to
> professionals (e.g., bookkeeping service, accountants, lawyers,
> auditors); this topic is related to (1) above because right now we
> operate very inexpensively (no paid legal counsel, no accountants, no
> bookkeepers, no required yearly auditing of the financial accounts,
> etc.) and I don't know what the ongoing costs would be to operate in
> various EU countries (e.g., would we need a paid financial audit every
> year?) ... this stuff can add up fast!

I would like to volunteer and help here. But I have some concerns.

The proposals and research is really great. But with an org being in the
Netherlands there will be still the language barrier and NL legal stuff
most of us are not aware of.

Doing bookkeeping and filing taxes is even challenging in your own
country and native language. So my concern would be that we heavily will
rely here on our NL members or pay for services.

The same concerns would apply to any other EU country or the UK. The EU
still hasn't standardized any of this.

> (and here's a deeper question: do we
> need a formal organization at all or could we structure things in a more
> lightweight manner with crowdfunding of conferences, ad-hoc donations
> for particular initiatives, simple hosting of specifications in a
> repository instead of having them be owned by an organization, etc.)
this is a very interesting question and idea. Would be great when there
is a way to run the org without all the red tape and bureaucracy a legal
org entity put on us.

Alex