Re: Copyright assignment

[Rob Adams <readams readams net>]

Unless you have a flock of lawyers handy ready to offer their legal
opinion on this list, I'd say this is an important issue and a consensus
needs to be reached, and soon because the final module list for Gnome
2.8 is due any day now...

As a community, we need to decide whether we are interested in seeing
copyright on project code assigned to a publicly-held, proprietary
software company, no matter how benevolent it may seem at present.
There are dangers involved, though the dangers are mitigated by the
nature of the GPL -- that much I can tell you without a lawyer.

One important question that needs to be answered here:  If Novell has no
interest in claiming proprietary interest in Evolution code, why do they
require copyright assignment?

-Rob

On Mon, 2004-08-02 at 11:39 -0400, Rodney Dawes wrote:
> Let's not talk about it again. Let's let some lawyers discuss it and
> post notes on here. Then we might have some valid concerns as opposed to
> undefined fears. :) I'm sure most of the people on this list are tired
> of having the same worn-out conversation over and over again about the
> copyright assignment for evolution code.
> 
> -- dobey
> 
> 
> On Mon, 2004-08-02 at 08:13 -0700, Rob Adams wrote:
> > Let's talk about copyright assignment again, shall we?
> > 
> > To wit:
> > http://news.com.com/Sun+mulls+buying+Novell/2100-7344_3-5292579.html?
> > tag=nefd.top
> > 
> > -Rob
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> desktop-devel-list mailing list
> desktop-devel-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
>