Re: Copyright assignment

[Sander Vesik <sander_traveling yahoo co uk>]

 --- Rob Adams <readams readams net> wrote: 
> 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.
> 

Precicely what are your fears anyways? 

It would really be best if all gnome (especially platform!!!) code *was* held by
some entity that was tasked with ensuring its continuing openness and use and
restricting from sell-offs [which you don't per say get with FSF]

> 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?

The ability to actually have a chance of successful prosecution of an infringement
case? 

> 
> -Rob

Sander,
    not speaking for sun in any way, shape or form 



	
	
		
___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun!  http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com