Re: Copyright assignment

 --- Elijah P Newren <newren math utah edu> wrote: 
> On Wed, 2004-08-04 at 07:11 -0600, Andreas J. Guelzow wrote:
> > On Wed, 2004-08-04 at 02:55, Rui Miguel Seabra wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2004-08-02 at 14:09 -0400, Miguel de Icaza wrote:
> > > > We want to keep the copyright for various reasons:
> > > > 	* We can relicense the code to someone on proprietary terms.
> > > >	  * It allows us to build proprietary features if we choose to.
> > > 
> > > This two are reason enough for not wanting to take even a slight look at
> > > mono.
> > 
> > In this whole discussion, this is surely the most important point. 
> I disagree entirely.  If you argue that we can't allow this, then you're
> also arguing that we can't allow a project that is under the BSD license
> (or MIT/X or similar) to be included in the Gnome D&DP--because such a
> project could also be made proprietary.  I totally disagree with that
> stance.  If you don't want to contribute to such a project, that's your
> choice, but I think it's totally unreasonable that BSD and MIT licensed
> projects should not be considered for inclusion in the Gnome desktop and
> platform.  Besides, as Fernando pointed out, we do have a precedent for
> required copyright assignment (libart_lgpl).

With all due respect - but this is UTTER TOTAL CRACK. The situation between 
a project that is based on BSD / MIT licence (like say libxml unless i'm
misremembering what Daniel did with the licencing situation) and a copyright
assignment giving a way for proprietary versions of code are entirely different.
Even more, wirth BSd licenced vs copyright assignment you get different "types"
od commercial spin-offs. There are many good and valid arguments both for against
allowing and disallowing copyright assigmnet but THIS is not one of them (besides
being wrong). 

> Elijah

___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun!

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]