|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

OpenOffice.org and contributor agreements

OpenOffice.org and contributor agreements

Posted May 22, 2011 13:42 UTC (Sun) by kleptog (subscriber, #1183)
In reply to: OpenOffice.org and contributor agreements by pphaneuf
Parent article: OpenOffice.org and contributor agreements

Well, IANAL but 'sub-licensing' means that any right you give Google, that they have the right to licence those to others.

If you look at the GPL, you'll see it talks about sub-licensing but says it's unnecessary since the GPL gives the receiver all the rights of the GPL from the original author so there is nothing to sub-license. So AFAICS it has no effect on strong-copyleft either.

It's certainly not assigning copyright. I don't think it can because in several jurisdictions you can't do that with an electronic form anyway. My theory is that the Google CLA is designed to be able to cover anything, not just open-source stuff, and that its effect on non-open source stuff is more profound. Documentation you submit comes to mind.

Still, I'd like someone with legal training to actually write something (you know, with citations and research) about the interaction between contributor agreements and copyright licences, because it vaguely feels like a dual-licensing arrangement, which always seemed like a dodgy part of copyright law to me anyway.


to post comments

OpenOffice.org and contributor agreements

Posted May 22, 2011 23:26 UTC (Sun) by pphaneuf (guest, #23480) [Link]

I just took a side-by-side read of the Apache and Google "individual" CLAs, and it seems to be almost identical, mostly changing "Foundation" with "Google", and I think the Apache one is older? So I doubt it's authors had much thought for non-open-source? I might be wrong here, this is just conjecture.

I'd be interested as well in such a article/paper.


Copyright © 2025, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds