Re: Foundation and Source Code Copyright
- From: "Luis Villa" <luis tieguy org>
- To: "Behdad Esfahbod" <behdad behdad org>
- Cc: Thomas Wood <thos gnome org>, Dave Neary <bolsh gnome org>, foundation-list gnome org, Juan José Sánchez Penas <jjsanchez igalia com>
- Subject: Re: Foundation and Source Code Copyright
- Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2007 16:05:42 -0400
On 8/3/07, Behdad Esfahbod <behdad behdad org> wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-08-03 at 21:48 +0200, Juan José Sánchez Penas wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 03, 2007 at 01:40:39PM -0400, Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
> > > ownership. When multiple companies (Red Hat, Novell, Sun, ...) own
> > > copyright on a package, it's harder to do something wrong (for example,
> > > to relicense the package under a new license).
> >
> > Is this always something wrong? I guess sometimes making easier to change a
> > license can be good (in terms of freedom, for example). All depends on how
> > much you (want to) trust the copyright holder.
>
> Yeah, could be good if it was easier to say change Evo from GPLv2 to
> GPLv3+, but you either end up having many copyright holders anyway (all
> the people submitting non-trivial patches on bugzilla) or risk blocking
> development by bureaucracy of having to submit disclaimer or assignment
> forms first, like what Sun is doing with Java right now, or FSF with
> Emacs and some other projects.
But of course you have to weigh that risk (which is very real) with
the risk of someone finding a gigantic loophole in the existing
license and driving a truck through it. Not that any of *our*
contributors would do such a thing. Ahem. ;)
Luis
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]