You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by Peter Samuelson <pe...@p12n.org> on 2007/10/10 15:58:34 UTC
Re: Licence of commit-block-joke.py, pre-commit-check.py,
pre-lock-require-needs-lock.py, tweak-log.cgi
[C. Michael Pilato]
> Any chance we could just have a policy that says, "If copyright/license are
> not declared, they default to what Subversion itself uses?"
Well, contributors need to _know_ their contribution is going to be
licensed in that way, so I suppose this needs to be written down
somewhere. Something like:
| By posting to this {mailing list / issue tracker} a patch that does
| not carry a copyright notice, you agree to assign copyright to
| CollabNet. Further, by posting a patch that does not carry a
| copyright license, you agree that your work can be distributed under
| the same terms as Subversion.
Though I wonder if that's enforceable.
--
Peter Samuelson | org-tld!p12n!peter | http://p12n.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Licence of commit-block-joke.py, pre-commit-check.py, pre-lock-require-needs-lock.py, tweak-log.cgi
Posted by Karl Fogel <kf...@red-bean.com>.
Max Bowsher <ma...@ukf.net> writes:
>> Note: CLA == "Copyright License Agreement", and is not the same as
>> assigment of copyright. I.e., it is *not* a transfer of ownership,
>> it is merely a granting of rights.
>
> Actually, "Contributor License Agreement" (at least in the Apache sense).
I'm sorry, I knew that -- just braino-d.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Licence of commit-block-joke.py, pre-commit-check.py, pre-lock-require-needs-lock.py,
tweak-log.cgi
Posted by Max Bowsher <ma...@ukf.net>.
Karl Fogel wrote:
> Malcolm Rowe <ma...@farside.org.uk> writes:
>> Frankly, most of our copyright notices are lies: the contributions are
>> really owned (in copyright terms) by the individual contributors or
>> their (contemporaneous) employees, and not just by CollabNet. I recall
>> that there was talk of getting signed CLAs to assign rights to
>> Subversion, Inc., but I don't know whether anyone's driving that.
>
> I'm driving it, just currently taken over by 1.5 work and some other
> things. We will get to eventually -- I hope soon after the Munich
> Subversion Conference next week (http://subconf.com/).
>
> Note: CLA == "Copyright License Agreement", and is not the same as
> assigment of copyright. I.e., it is *not* a transfer of ownership,
> it is merely a granting of rights.
Actually, "Contributor License Agreement" (at least in the Apache sense).
Max.
Re: Licence of commit-block-joke.py, pre-commit-check.py, pre-lock-require-needs-lock.py, tweak-log.cgi
Posted by Karl Fogel <kf...@red-bean.com>.
Malcolm Rowe <ma...@farside.org.uk> writes:
> Frankly, most of our copyright notices are lies: the contributions are
> really owned (in copyright terms) by the individual contributors or
> their (contemporaneous) employees, and not just by CollabNet. I recall
> that there was talk of getting signed CLAs to assign rights to
> Subversion, Inc., but I don't know whether anyone's driving that.
I'm driving it, just currently taken over by 1.5 work and some other
things. We will get to eventually -- I hope soon after the Munich
Subversion Conference next week (http://subconf.com/).
Note: CLA == "Copyright License Agreement", and is not the same as
assigment of copyright. I.e., it is *not* a transfer of ownership,
it is merely a granting of rights.
-Karl
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Licence of commit-block-joke.py, pre-commit-check.py,
pre-lock-require-needs-lock.py, tweak-log.cgi
Posted by Malcolm Rowe <ma...@farside.org.uk>.
On Wed, Oct 10, 2007 at 10:58:34AM -0500, Peter Samuelson wrote:
>
> [C. Michael Pilato]
> > Any chance we could just have a policy that says, "If copyright/license are
> > not declared, they default to what Subversion itself uses?"
>
> Well, contributors need to _know_ their contribution is going to be
> licensed in that way, so I suppose this needs to be written down
> somewhere. Something like:
>
> | By posting to this {mailing list / issue tracker} a patch that does
> | not carry a copyright notice, you agree to assign copyright to
> | CollabNet. Further, by posting a patch that does not carry a
> | copyright license, you agree that your work can be distributed under
> | the same terms as Subversion.
>
> Though I wonder if that's enforceable.
>
<IANAL>
No, it's not. You can't assign copyright implicitly: some places (e.g.
the US) require a signed copyright assignment, and some (Germany?) don't
allow for transfer of copyright at all.
So for example, the FSF requires copyright assignments, while the ASF
requires instead that people sign Contributor License Agreements (which
give them much of the benefits of copyright assignation without actually
transferring copyright).
Frankly, most of our copyright notices are lies: the contributions are
really owned (in copyright terms) by the individual contributors or
their (contemporaneous) employees, and not just by CollabNet. I recall
that there was talk of getting signed CLAs to assign rights to
Subversion, Inc., but I don't know whether anyone's driving that.
</IANAL>
Regards,
Malcolm