Not logged in
Log in now
Create an account
Subscribe to LWN
LWN.net Weekly Edition for May 23, 2013
An "enum" for Python 3
An unexpected perf feature
LWN.net Weekly Edition for May 16, 2013
A look at the PyPy 2.0 release
Anyone look at it yet?
Posted Sep 16, 2010 22:43 UTC (Thu) by corbet (editor, #1)
Posted Sep 17, 2010 3:50 UTC (Fri) by jspaleta (subscriber, #50639)
And actually... I would image violation enforcement actually gets much more complicated with co-ownership of a particular contribution because you'd have to check with all co-owners to make sure they haven't potentially licensed the work to the alleged violator. Even the more typical argument for assignment to a benevolent project entity to make enforcement easier doesn't necessarily hold with co-ownership.
Posted Sep 17, 2010 17:22 UTC (Fri) by codewiz (subscriber, #63050)
All contributor agreements for free software actually grant you co-ownership of your own code. Do they grant the contributor co-ownership of the entire codebase? Of course not.
So the agreement creates a huge disparity between community contributors and one organization that retains 100% of the code ownership, including the right to relicense it and sell proprietary versions of it.
Developers who care about retaining control of their online identity should think twice before signing a legal paper that makes them loose control of their own code.
Posted Sep 17, 2010 18:05 UTC (Fri) by jspaleta (subscriber, #50639)
For example, the FSF's assignment requirement for contribution to GNU codebases is not co-ownership. Its a full transfer with a broad license back and some additional language putting limits on what the FSF can do in terms of re-licensing your contribution. One you assign copyright ownership over to the FSF for a contribution for GNU, you no longer have standing to bring a lawsuit for violation of the licensing terms for that contribution if anyone violates the copyright license. Only the owner can do that, which in this case is the FSF. If you make use of that code in another project, you are only acting as a licensee of that code..not the owner.
I'm actually not aware of another project at the moment which uses a co-ownership mechanism in its contributor agreement.
Posted Sep 23, 2010 7:50 UTC (Thu) by ekj (guest, #1524)
Posted Sep 23, 2010 8:27 UTC (Thu) by codewiz (subscriber, #63050)
Posted Sep 17, 2010 3:58 UTC (Fri) by wmf (guest, #33791)
Posted Sep 23, 2010 15:09 UTC (Thu) by cowsandmilk (guest, #55475)
Bottom of fsf.org :
Copyright © 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
OH NOES, RICHARD STALLMAN TRICKED US ALL INTO DONATING TO A FOR-PROFIT COMPANY
Copyright © 2013, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds