| |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||
IncorrectIncorrectPosted Apr 20, 2005 4:37 UTC (Wed) by newren (subscriber, #5160)In reply to: Incorrect by JoeBuck Parent article: Lack of developers delays OpenOffice.org (ComputerWorld)
If I was incorrect, then the gcc site which explains how to contribute to gcc (http://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html#legal)--and which I linked to to back up what I said--is wrong. That URL states that "If a contributor is reluctant to sign a copyright assignment for a large change, a disclaimer is acceptable as well. However, a copyright assignment is more convenient if a contributor plans to make several separate contributions."
However, digging further, it turns out that what you claim does match what is said at http://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/maintain.html#Copyright-..., which states that "Before incorporating significant changes, make sure that the person who wrote the changes has signed copyright papers and that the Free Software Foundation has received and signed them. We may also need a disclaimer from the person's employer."
So, it looks like the general gnu maintainer guidelines conflict with the information on the gcc site.... odd.
(Log in to post comments)
Incorrect Posted Apr 20, 2005 14:43 UTC (Wed) by jamesh (subscriber, #1159) [Link] The copyright disclaimer form does provide similar legal protection to the FSF as a copyright assignment form. The main difference is that code covered by a disclaimer is essentially public domain, so the FSF can't bring a GPL violation case with respect to that code.
Incorrect -- again Posted Apr 21, 2005 0:53 UTC (Thu) by Ross (subscriber, #4065) [Link] You misunderstand. There are two types of copyright disclaimers beingdiscussed. One is disclaiming copyright interest by directly putting a work into the public domain. The other is getting a sign-off from employers and schools that they do not claim ownership of a contribution by one of their employees or students. This does not mean the employee or student wishes to place the work in the public domain. It simply means that if they assign the copyright to the FSF that it would be a legitimate act and that the employer or school can't come along later and say they are the "real" owner and didn't consent to the copyright assignment.
|
|||||||||||