TYPO3 Association Board Meeting Protocol (16 September 2026)
Decisions included approving a partnership with EOSA and a statement on copyright liability for TYPO3 Core and extensions. Preparations are also underway for an Extraordinary General Assembly, proposed for 29 October 2026, and a Unit Kick-Off Day in November.
Attendance
- Olivier Dobberkau (President)
- Stefan Busemann (Treasurer)
- Martin Helmich (Secretary)
- Jochen Weiland (Member of the Board)
- Thomas Maroschik (Member of the Board)
- Daniel Fau (CEO, TYPO3 GmbH)
- Frank Nägler (CTO, TYPO3 GmbH)
- Mathias Bolt Lesniak (Project Ambassador, TYPO3 Association)
- Rachel Foucard (Compliance Officer, TYPO3 Association)
Absent: Jana Höffner (Vice President)
Five Minutes for Mathias
A review of recent outreach efforts highlighted significant interest from major businesses in Norway regarding new working practices and documentation. Additionally, Mathias provided an update on a new AI-generated event report system, which has notably reduced the administrative time required for creating event reports.
Governance Working Group Status Update
The board received a status update on the Governance Working Group, which has been actively reviewing feedback from policy pull requests. Preparation is currently underway for a Unit Kick-Off Day in November, with preparation work currently focusing on defining roles and compiling invitee lists. Immediate next steps involve inviting stakeholders who provided feedback to prepare bylaw changes for the new Unit structure, with a target timeline for these preparations set for the next two weeks.
Extraordinary General Assembly (EGA) Preparations
Preparations for the upcoming Extraordinary General Assembly were discussed, with a proposed date of 29 October 2026. The board agreed that focusing on clear distribution of roles during the session is more important than specific tooling, and decided to continue using the existing meeting platform. A timeline for preparing bylaw changes and issuing invitations was established, and the necessity for clear communication regarding the scope of this assembly was emphasized.
EOSA Partnership
The board finalized the approval of the partnership with the European Open Source Academy (EOSA). This decision followed a period of deliberation during the meeting and concurrent asynchronous voting, resulting in six affirmative votes.
Statement Requested on Copyright Liability
A request from the Best Practices Team regarding copyright liability was addressed. The board reviewed a response prepared by the Compliance Officer, which clarifies that liability is determined by specific legal jurisdictions and facts rather than universal rules. The response notes that the board is currently focusing on establishing and communicating clear internal processes for handling such reports rather than providing individual legal advice.
TYPO3 Company Report 2025
The board discussed the 2025 financial statement regarding the TYPO3 Company. Please note that this agenda item is classified as confidential due to the sensitive nature of the financial reporting.
Appendices
Request by the Best Practices Team
Who bears the risk if a rights holder sends a cease-and-desist letter with legal costs, or sues directly — especially since recovering costs from the original contributor afterward is often impractical, as contributors can’t always be reliably identified.
Requested clarification, for both Core and Extensions:
- Core: Would liability fall on the merging developers, the Association as a whole, or individual Board members?
- Extensions: Who bears the risk?
Response by Compliance Officer, Approved by TYPO3 Association Board
tl;dr:
The “risk of being sued” cannot be allocated in advance: an author claimant decides whom to sue. Legal responsibility is determined afterward by the competent court. If the question is the liability, the precise allocation of liability depends on the applicable jurisdiction and the specific facts. The Board therefore cannot provide a universal legal answer, but it can clarify TYPO3’s internal process for receiving and handling such claims.
More Detailed Answer
Indeed, requesting the removal of the code is not a mandatory step before taking legal action. Depending on the applicable jurisdiction and the circumstances, a rights holder may send a formal cease-and-desist letter or initiate legal proceedings directly.
Anyone alleged to have contributed to, published, or distributed the infringing code could potentially receive a claim or be named in legal proceedings. Being sued does not, however, mean that the person will ultimately be held liable.
For TYPO3 Core, potential defendants could include the original contributor and the TYPO3 Association as the entity responsible for the official distribution of the Core. Other entities distributing the affected code could also potentially be targeted. Individual mergers or Board members would not ordinarily be personally liable merely because of their role, although liability may depend on their own conduct and the applicable law.
For extensions, the primary potential defendants would generally be the contributor, maintainer, or organization publishing the extension. The TYPO3 Extension Repository appears to fall within the category of open-source software development and sharing platforms, which are excluded from the definition of an “online content-sharing service provider” under Article 2(6) and recital 62 of Directive (EU) 2019/790. Consequently, the specific liability regime established by Article 17 should not apply to the Association in relation to extensions uploaded by third parties, without prejudice to any obligations or liability arising under other applicable laws.
Whether the TYPO3 Association could or would seek recovery from a contributor would depend entirely on the specific circumstances, including the contributor’s conduct, the legal basis for a claim, the harm suffered, and the proportionality of taking legal action. It would therefore not be appropriate to make a general statement in advance.
We are not lawyers, and even a qualified lawyer would be unable to provide a single exhaustive answer without knowing the specific circumstances, jurisdictions, parties involved, and applicable laws. What would be genuinely useful to the community, however, is to establish and clearly communicate a process for reporting and handling suspected copyright or licensing violations.