Changes between Initial Version and Version 1 of org/meetings/2017Amsterdam/Notes/Funding


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Mar 27, 2017, 11:42:59 AM (23 months ago)
Author:
alison
Comment:

added notes

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • org/meetings/2017Amsterdam/Notes/Funding

    v1 v1  
     1== Funding session during strategic planning plenary ==
     2
     3Participants: Brad, Erin, Juris, Moritz, Pepijn, Linus
     4
     5Intros:
     6Brad: CFO since November, works out of the Seattle office
     7Erin: HR, works out of the Seattle office
     8Juris: torservers.net
     9Moritz: torservers.net, Renewable Freedom Foundation
     10Pepijn: lawyer, volunteer, Dutch torservers org
     11Linus: sysadmin, software developer in Sweden; involved in some European
     12Commission projects
     13
     14Linus:
     15 more relevant now with Trump/changes at State Dept
     16 question of who is responsible within Tor to bring in funding, and how
     17
     18Brad: current funding
     19 - direct grants, eg DRL, ended in Nov, new one is coming along
     20 - milestone grants "fee for service"
     21 - cost reimbursement grants eg NRL (currently 5 collaborations within
     22university projects)
     23 - improve private foundations relationships, are minor
     24 - SIDA large proposal
     25 stability: two large proposals, hope is at least one goes through and
     26then the next year is safe; no immediate need to worry
     27Linus: model Amnesty, that take no gov funding at all
     28 -> 5yr plan how to diversify funding
     29
     30Brad: also, this reduces administrative burden since gov grants are not
     31easy to manage
     32
     33 - look at "customers"; as example, WashingtonPost (via SecureDrop),
     34rich guy behind the newspaper maybe interested?
     35
     36Erin: diversity across users; individuals/endusers via donations
     37- with all the downsides, maybe state money provides also protection
     38
     39Pepijn: the world sees Tor as a US(gov) project; very bad for reputation
     40 -> it's about user trust
     41
     42Juris: the incentive to support a US(gov) funded entity as an individual
     43is low (counter-example ACLU)
     44
     45Brad: idea of endowment(s) built with a specific goal and filled by
     46private foundations and other donors
     47
     48Tor For Profit Activities:
     49 - we had this conversation multiple times but not really any progress
     50 - basically the viable option is to "give your brand" to other activities
     51
     52Erin: example Amazon might want to use Tor -> Problem of SLA, could Tor
     53guarantee anything based on a volunteer network? How does this influence
     54the motivation of our relay operators?
     55
     56"European Tor":
     57 - several conversations mixed into one: A European Tor entity vs.
     58partnerships with other organizations as "pass-through" to Tor people
     59 - participation in EC-funded projects
     60
     61We run out of time, so some steps forward?
     62
     63- Mapping of all potential and existing funding sources
     64 - rank them by amount of energy put into that channel, and how much
     65energy would need to be invested with what likely outcome
     66 - define a goal where we want to be. example: "we aim that any one
     67source of funding is only be 25% of the total budget"  (does this also
     68apply to grassroots?)
     69
     70Linus: we should look at all continents, and build more relationships
     71Brad: "Girls scout example", more franchising and backend services for
     72independent groups
     73
     74 - make sure Tor developers get funding, which not necessarily has to go
     75through TorProject Inc; example of EC-grant, would Tor write the
     76proposal and have CompanyX execute it by employing Tor people?
     77
     78 - separate legal entities that are limited by trademark/license
     79agreement; which criteria? Will TPI help those organizations with their
     80grantwriting, roadmapping etc?