[Noisebridge-board] Hologlyphics Grant info for Board
walter at hologlyphics.com
Mon Dec 1 23:55:00 UTC 2008
Hi Noisebridge Board,
Sorry it took a bitto respond, I was busy with visiting this weekend.
I would have noproblem drafting a legal agreement with Carol, the Noisebridge lawyer, butsince the letter of intent is due Wednesday, I do not think this would bepossible in time. As far as all the work on the proposal, I had made it clear Iwas going to do all the work on the administrative end, write the grantmyself(with help from my wonderful editor), and pull together all the worksamples. I would include the voice of Noisebridge as much as possible, and alsoask for feedback to made adjustments. This was to be in the style of SudoLeadership, I would just do all it myself.
The same goes for theengineering work, the main collaboration would be developing killer 3D content,movies and/or video installation projects.
I do not expect orsee dozens of hours of work on the part of noisebridge members. My concept wasto come to noisebridge with a very solid project and plan, well thought out,with the perspective that I have the ability and experience to pull it off.
As far as funding is concerned, I wouldnever depend on a grant for funding, and never considered the funding ?potentialearning?. The money was meant to help the project accelerate at a rate quickerthan possible with self funding. It would never cross my mind to claim damagesfor loss of potential earning. If things fell through, I would just take theperspective that things did not work out.
I have never suedanyone and hope to never have think about something like that. The purpose ofthe grant idea was to help the Hologlyphic Video Art system grow at an acceleratedrate, and hopefully allow this type of creative work to propagate and stay inthe hands of interesting artists, away from commercial product development.
With 15 years ofresearch into 3D imaging, a huge pile of code base, existing hardware, and threenew hardware designs, the funding would just be another element in thisprocess. It never occurred to me to view this as income. I am not looking togain more money. 3D movies and video without glasses is my life, it?s what Ilove.
While it would bepossible to continue development as a Noisebridge member, I do think the grant isan excellent opportunity. The funder is very interested in this project, I havebeen to several of their workshops and in contact since, and the fiscal sponsoris equally intrigued by the project and concept. I can?t say for sure how soon Iwill have my own money for Noisbridge membership and materials for building alarger system. The grant opportunity would help the art and technology growunhindered.
As of now it seemsthat the grant idea will not work due to time constraints, considering the new requestto draft an agreement with Carol. If something changes by tomorrow night?smeeting, please let me know. Again Mitch did agree to be the point person aswas requested at last week?s meeting.
I still think thegrant is an excellent opportunity to create an amazing platform for new art andtechnology, building on over a decade and half of dedicated work, not a dangerof being sued.
From: Andy Isaacson [mailto:adi at hexapodia.org]
Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2008 06:34 PM
To: board at lists.noisebridge.net
Cc: 'Walter Funk'
Subject: Re: [Noisebridge-board] Hologlyphics Grant info for Board
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 05:43:32PM +0000, Walter Funk wrote:> Andy asked me to send info along about thefunder, he wants to asses if> there will be any sticky legal issues forNoisebridge.Last night at the> meeting there wasconsensus to move forward on this project if a> noisebridge person would offerto be a point person, Mitch Altman said> he would be the point person.[snip]> http://www.creativeworkfund.org/modern/apply.html> http://www.creativeworkfund.org/modern/howtoapply.htmlWalter,Thanks very much for sending this information along.To reiterate, I think Hologlyphics is a fascinating project and I whollysupport having a hologlyphics project at Noisebridge.To my mind, the ideal way for Noisebridge to facilitate theHologlyphics project is for any interested collaborators to becomemembers of Noisebridge, to collaborate with others in the space, and toeither self-finance or solicit donations towards materials from outside.This is the method that's being used for RepRap and several otherprojects at Noisebridge. It does not depend on external grants norimpose the overhead of the grant process.I have several concerns about what the CWF (Creative Work Fund) proposalprocess would mean for Noisebridge.My reading of this material indicates that if the Letter of Inquiry isaccepted and the project were selected to provide a detailed proposal,preparing the proposal would require Noisebridge to provide asignificant amount of information: "Full proposals, due June 3, 2009,include documentation illustrating the quality of the artist's work,detailed budgets, and additional background information about theorganizations." This means several dozen hours of effort by Noisebridgemembers.If Noisebridge agreed to sign the Letter of Inquiry and then failed toperform the necessary work to complete the Full Proposal, the artistwould, I'm afraid, have a completely reasonable claim of action againstNoisebridge for the loss of earning potential. Were this to go to courtNoisebridge would probably be found partially liable for the loss. Theartist could, I suppose, agree to indemnify Noisebridge for allpotential losses in regards this grant.I am uncomfortable having Noisebridge agree to pursue this grant, giventhat we do not have a significant grant-raising track record, have nointerest in pursuing grants on our own, are not interested in building agrant-pursuing organization, have no established means to compensatepeople for work done on grantwriting, and have no need for grants tocover our expenses. Note that in this case, "Grants will be awarded tocollaborating 501 (c)(3) nonprofit organizations, not directly tocollaborating artists." So we'd also have to build a structure todisburse the grant, and deal with reporting requirements.In my mind, in order for Noisebridge to pursue a grant proposal likethis we'd need1. a specific member (or members) to step up with a promise to do allthe work necessary to complete the grant proposal. THIS IS A NONTRIVIALAMOUNT OF (really boring) WORK. IT MAY BE IMPOSSIBLE. OTHER MEMBERSMAY DECLINE TO HELP EVEN THOUGH YOU'VE SPENT HUNDREDS OF HOURS AND ITWOULD ONLY TAKE THEM 10 MINUTES.2. the collaborator to agree to take on all legal liability (includingindemnifying Noisebridge for all legal expenses connected to any actionarising from the grant process, including for nonperformance,nonpayment, tardiness, et cetera), and to pay for Carol (our lawyer) todraft an agreement to that effect.I could be convinced that the legalese is not necessary, but once moneygets involved I get *MUCH* more cautious. It'd take a lot ofconvincing.Please feel free to try to convince me -- and of course, I'm not theonly decisionmaker here; if the consensus is that the issues aresufficiently addressed, I'm fine with that.Ways to *not* convince me: * focus on the fiscal return to Noisebridge * talk about building a more heavyweight structure than we have * talk about outsourcing the overhead to an outside orgThanks,-andy
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Board