# Minutes of Copernicus meeting 2022-09-29 in NFT playground

## Things we MUST vote on

The must vote list is intended to clarify what MUST be centrally regulated in the DAO.
The starting point is to **experiment** within the borders that this list offers. A consensus vote is needed to change a subject/item on this list.

- Name is **Copernicus Beer**
- Receipe
- Logo ![image alt](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/copernicusbeer/copernicus-beer-logo/main/Copernicus%20Logo.png "title" =100x100)

- Style use
- Font Roboto mono

- Label contains
- COPERNICUS (Capital letters)
- Logo
- 24 qrcodes
- Use of the colors black, white and red
- Expiration date
- Batch number
- Name of brewer

- Various thresholds:
- Volume produced per batch and/or per tokenholder
- Budget from a certain amount
- minimum share to brew
- Amount of split tokens
- Legal terms & conditions
- Each batch is brewed at the token holder's own expense and risk
- Whitelabel
- Legal branding
- working under CC0 or CC-DAO

Decentrally vote on this list

## Things we SHOULD vote on
- franchise fee
- mandating a circle to do certain work

## Ideas sprung off from the cummunity call
Disclaimer: It's always tricky to formulate a general or common idea. Every one has a different opinion. However, the text below tries to grasp the essence of the discussion and consensus we might have reached there. Feel free to amend the text below ; if you'd like to do so, we need you to sign into hackmd.io, for version control reasons.

### Circles / groups
The idea of having creative groups ("circles") where you can volunteer to contribute to, was well received by the tokenholders present. So centralized preparation and decentralized control: The result is a proposal that MUST be voted on.
#### Points to discuss
- Is volunteering the same as 'noncommittal'?

### Receipe and branding
Everything you do and create is owned by the DAO, by the group. We realised that current ownership are still personal:
- Receipe : Hans
- Branding / logo : Bas

The intention is there to transfer ownership of both assets of the Copernicus DAO to the DAO. However, there's not a legal entity yet to transfer it to.
Creative ownhership (authorship) can never be fully transfered; it stays with the original creator (Hans, Bas respectively).

#### Points to deep dive into
- What legal DAO entity is possible in which jurisdiction?
- How can the legal entity be governed from the DAO in a proportional way (e.g. important issues only)?
- The explicit intention from the current owners to transfer (co?)ownership and whether the conditions for this future action have been fulfilled so far (e.g. remuneration for the pre-period in tokens). Are there any open points that could obstruct a smooth transfer once the DAO is a legal entity with a governance structure?

### Circles
- Legal (Krijn+?), status COMMITMENT: set up terms & conditions in draft proposal for the DAO, mainly to avoid liabilities for tokenholders.
- Finance (Martin, Henk), status ACTIVE: proposal to finance brewing beer tokenholders DAO under insurrance from the DAO has been withdrawn for various reasons. The circle will proceed with gentlemen's agreement draft between tokenholders in the roles *lender* and *borrower*.
- Sales (?), status IDEA: how can we learn *collectively* from Copericus-beer sales by individual tokenholders.
- see more in the Copercinus DAO Whatsapp chat