| |||||||||||
Does dual licensing threaten free software? (Linux Journal)Does dual licensing threaten free software? (Linux Journal)Posted Aug 3, 2006 2:39 UTC (Thu) by rickmoen (subscriber, #6943)In reply to: Does dual licensing threaten free software? (Linux Journal) by zotz Parent article: Does dual licensing threaten free software? (Linux Journal) "zotz" wrote: Some percentage of people may not help as a result of having to assign copyrights to their improvements over to the project. I deny the premise: It's simply untrue to claim that anyone need sign over copyrights to the product. Of course, the flip side is that the aspiring-to-canonical project's maintainers need not accept your contribution, if you are not so willing. Essentially, a project that says "We want your patches' copyright title, so as to have the right to multilicense without your specific leave" is implicitly saying "OK, want the ability to fork our codebase? No problem, go for it, and may the best maintainer win." And meanwhile, you retain the option of accepting its patches under copyleft terms, as long as they continute to produce them. Which is the way free software works, n'est-ce pas? Rick Moen
(Log in to post comments)
|
|||||||||||