Re: Another job for the Gnome Foundation ?

[jg pa dec com (Jim Gettys)]

> Sender: foundation-list-admin@gnome.org
> From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
> Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 16:21:45 +0100
> To: foundation-list@gnome.org
> Subject: Another job for the Gnome Foundation ?
> -----
> Certain folks seem to be trying to do copyright assignments but without
> understanding all the issues that the FSF mostly addressed. It seems a very
> bad idea to have specific Gnome vendors doing copyright assignments on
> projects for several reasons
> 
> 1.	It gives them the power to run off wih the code
> 2.	In the event of bankrupcy or takeover they may have no choice
>         but to run off with the code
> 3
> 
> 
>

The X experience is that it is very dangerous for there to be centralized 
copyright assignment: one of the things that let us get the copyright 
fixed after the TOG fiasco was that most of the code was actually copyright 
the various companies, making it easier to disentangle (TOG could only 
change the copyrights they owned, which were only the X consortium ones).  
I have no more trust in some foundation staying solvent than I do in any 
particular company, nor do I (or many others) see any reason to trust 
the FSF.

The problem could have been avoided entirely if copyright ownership were 
joint: with 20-20 hindsight, the best thing when the X consortium was 
shut down would have been to assign all the copyrights of the X consortium 
to all of the companies who made it up jointly: then it could not have 
been messed with.

So in fact, I think given recent experience, that it would be best if
sole copyright not normally go to a gnome foundation, but that the gnome
foundation be able to become joint owner easily.
					- Jim


--
Jim Gettys
Technology and Corporate Development
Compaq Computer Corporation
jg@pa.dec.com