Bitcoin Unlimited Foundation (BUF)

[solex]

The Bitcoin Unlimited Articles has provision for the organization to register as a non-profit and enjoy tax-exempt status for its activities.

BU has continued to grow so the time has arrived where this step is desirable for operational purposes. The intention is that the BUF articles should mirror the BU articles as much as possible. The membership will control the BUF because its directors will be the three BU officers which are already subject to membership election.

Input on this process from the membership is important and welcomed. This OP will be fleshed out with further detail, and the thread itself is the best place to hammer out all the details while the process is underway.

[BUF Articles are pending]

 

[solex]

This is goods news and with careful planning the resources can go a long way.

@solex Why will the non-profit be set-up in the USA as opposed to any other jurisdiction, say the UK? Will there be an election for the board of directors etc.? Thanks.

UK charitable status is indeed an option. The stated preference for the US simply stems from it being a popular location for Bitcoin ecosystem businesses who are likely to provide sponsorship or participate in BU events, hence non-donated revenue and expenditure would be in greater amounts, ergo having tax-exempt status is more worthwhile.

The BU officers who are already elected by the membership will be the BUF directors and will step down or stand for re-election as their terms expire.

 

[Roy Badami]

I doubt that the BUF would qualify for UK charitable status. The legal definition of a "charitable purpose" is pretty narrow - see https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/what-makes-a-charity-cc4/what-makes-a-charity-cc4#part-3

EDIT: there are other options in English law, however. A Company Limited by Guarantee would be one approach: a rather strange kind of company that has members rather than shareholders (and it could be set up so that its Articles of Association prohibit it from distributing profits to its members). This is the structure that Nominet (the registry for the .uk ccTLD) has.

I have no idea how a US non-profit operates, but the Nominet model over here seems quite attractive: a non-profit company that is legally owned and run by its members.

 

[Roy Badami]

One thought I had following on from the idea of a Company Limited by Guarantee is that all legal Members (technically Guarantors, but typically only on the hook for £1 and refered to as Members) would have to be on the Company's Register of Members - which would essentially rule out anonymous Members.

Ok, now I'm assuming we're not going to go down that route and are going to be a US non-profit, but it got me thinking. I have concerns as to how anonymous/pseudonymous membership can work once BU is put on a legal footing.

Now, personally, I'm not a fan of anonymous and pseudonymous identities, but I realise that not everyone agrees with me here. But given the impossibility of knowing whether such members are actually unique individuals, allowing such members to vote would, to my mind, risk openning the Foundation to legal challenges. Obviously IANAL and I know nothing about US non-profits.

My starting proposal would be that the Bitcoin Unlimited Foundation (like the Bitcoin Foundation), should require all Members to supply their real name. (I'm happy to consider the idea that the Foundation should allow Members to request that their names not appear on any public membership list, though.) I realise this idea is going to be unpopular with some - as I said, just my first thoughts...

 

[HelloGuy]

I agree with Roy. Freedom needs brave people to stand up and speak. Doing some anonymous posts behind Tor network can help, but ultimately, the freedom is protected by people like Snowden, came out and fight publicly, with real identity.

 

[Roy Badami]

@HelloGuy I don't think Snowden is a good analogy. BUF will, I am sure, operate entirely within the law - and I would not be interested in having any part in it if that were not to be the case.

 

[solex]

My starting proposal would be that the Bitcoin Unlimited Foundation (like the Bitcoin Foundation), should require all Members to supply their real name. (I'm happy to consider the idea that the Foundation should allow Members to request that their names not appear on any public membership list, though.) I realise this idea is going to be unpopular with some - as I said, just my first thoughts...

Lots of good points. Your starting point looks like how we will have to go. The BUF will likely need two classes of membership:
1. "Real name" members who will have voting powers.
2. Anonymous members who won't be able to vote.

Regardless, members are valued and certainly welcome to provide support or advice as BU progresses.

I can confirm also that the BUF will operate within the law (certainly while I am around

 

[Roy Badami]

Ok, anonymous non-voting members would probably work. Good thought.

 

[freetrader]

It is my understanding that the Bitcoin Unlimited Foundation has been formally set up.

Can the officers please provide information on its constitution / charter?

 

[solex]

@freetrader It is registered, but the next step to define its articles has languished in the drafting, so we have been let down and we need to hire different professional services.

 

[satoshis_sockpuppet]

IANAL But I don't think it's impossible for you to have a registered association, that has to follow certain rules (no anonymous member votes) but still keep the current voting system in place.
Voting on a BUIP in this forum (by signing with your key, can still be anonymous) doesn't have to be changed. The registered foundation could just accept these elections and votes.

Of course, this could be overridden by the non-anonymous members of the "official" foundation but afaik the guys managing the funds could run away the BU money today as well so that doesn't change too much.

Just create a foundation and let the official members of this foundation vote on a system, that allows the current BUIP votes to be the way of decision making.

I'm sure I could create a foundation, where the money spending is decided by twitter polls if I wanted.

 

[bitPico]

If Unlimited registers as a USA or UK tax exempt non-profit it can be sued. Code with nothing attached cannot be sued. Unlimited needs an attorney instead of a foundation if it wants to survive being decentralized and out of adversaries control.

 

[bitsein]

Nice work guys!