Re: BSD license vs. Evolution assigment (was Re: Copyright assignment)

On Fri, 2004-08-06 at 19:25 +0000, Carlos Morgado wrote:
> > My outrage goes at the attempt of circunventing the GPL that this
> > represents. It outrages me even more to see a GF board member stand by
> > it.
> You're just so wrong in your interpretation I'm starting to believe you've  
> been body snatched or something.
> 1(c) is legalese to say "you really grant us copyright, no bars held"

  -> "so we can license it in any way we want"

> 4  - "Ximian may at its sole discretion also offer the Works or a Program  
> enhanced by the Works under other license terms."
> *also*, what bit of also is there to not understand ?

  -> simple word play in order to make sure the sla^W"contributor" can't
say he didn't know they could turn his code into proprietary. Most
people don't read this documents, or think of the best possible
intentions and not of what's written.

  -> there's nothing here they have to always do it both ways.

> If Ximian ever stops distributing your contributions under a free license  
> they void the contract, they can multi license it like any (c) holder.

No. They can release it in 2.1 and not release it in 2.2. After all,
they've already made it available in 2.1.

> Actually, I'd be much more concerned by 7. if I was considering signing it  
> but I'm not, so I'll be ignoring the rest of this thread.

That is more of an inconvenience due to distance. It's a normal clause
in contracts to define where law matters should be dealt.


+ No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown
+ Whatever you do will be insignificant,
| but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi
+ So let's do it...?

Please AVOID sending me WORD, EXCEL or POWERPOINT attachments.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

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