[Members] Re: XSF EU Legal Structure: Example Proposals

Dear All, As previously mentioned, I believe we should first consider why we should transfer the XSF to the European Union as a legal entity. While the fact that most current XSF members are based in Europe is certainly an argument in favour of the transfer, I do not consider it sufficient to justify the costs and legal consequences of the change, at least while the United States remains a democracy in which freedom of association is guaranteed without government interference (hopefully for many decades to come, if not forever). However, I do believe that it would be highly beneficial for the XSF to establish a representative office in Europe, ideally in Brussels, to lobby the European Union's representative and legislative bodies. This would be particularly useful i.e. for promoting the effective implementation of the interoperability principles set out in the Digital Markets Act (DMA) for messaging services, which currently remain largely unimplemented. With regard to bank payments, I believe that the XSF, even as a US legal entity, could hold a bank account in Europe and appoint someone to operate it on behalf of the foundation. This solution would ease some of Peter's current burdens. Mario domenica 8 marzo 2026 14:27, eevvoor via Members <members(a)xmpp.org> ha scritto: > On 3/8/26 2:26 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > > On 3/8/26 12:46 AM, Dan Caseley wrote: > >> I read this as "Don't bother licensing the Jabber trademark" since > >> we're not really using it. > > > > Correct. > > > > Existing license-holders would continue to have permission to use the > > JABBER mark (I believe - we'll have to check this with lawyers), but new > > applicants would need to talk with Cisco directly instead of working > > through the XSF or a successor organization. > > > > Peter > > > >