Not logged in
Log in now
Create an account
Subscribe to LWN
LWN.net Weekly Edition for December 5, 2013
Deadline scheduling: coming soon?
LWN.net Weekly Edition for November 27, 2013
ACPI for ARM?
LWN.net Weekly Edition for November 21, 2013
But that is not the nature of Free Software. The entire philosophy of Free Software is that everyone should have equal rights to software regardless of who participated in it's creation. Full stop.
There is simply no way you can reconcile contributor agreements with the philosophy of Free Software.
Use a different license that explicitly gives your organization special rights. Don't try to misappropriate Free Software licenses by having a secondary agreement to sign.
Ubuntu developer summit
Posted May 11, 2011 21:02 UTC (Wed) by jg (subscriber, #17537)
1) getting them "right" is very hard. I would not/could not sign the Fedora agreement for years due to language that made it unclear exactly what I might be signing away rights to. At the time, I was on the X.org board, and that agreement was written in a way at that time that made it unclear if I might be speaking on behalf of the parent upstream organization, X.org (as opposed to whatever Fedora specific work I might be doing for which I have little problems giving RH rights to).
2) if you work for a corporation, you will usually have to have the agreements reviewed by legal counsel; and it effectively doubles the amount of legal effort to get something "over the wall" to benefit anyone. The inertial barrier is already high enough. And with the problems I covered in 1), you can get into dread "lawyer wait", where no one wants to take any responsibility for their actions, or because the agreement is just hard to understand and therefore review is not timely.
If you are just publishing code under a "standard" major open source license, then legal departments generally don't have to understand the licenses again and again; they internalize the specific licenses.
So contributor agreements between contributors (in a company) to a project like Ubuntu means that we go from a order N problem (of licenses) to add contributor agreements to each project that requires them.
Posted May 11, 2011 22:10 UTC (Wed) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946)
I am assuming you are talking about
It was based on Apache CLA and had some additional unneeded complexity.
FWIW, the new agreement is at
Should be straight forward and simple.
Copyright © 2013, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds