Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Forming Gentoo Policy - Copyright Assignment and Attribution

[Stanislav Ochotnicky]

Quoting Greg KH (2013-03-11 22:19:55)
> On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 04:51:17PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> >
> > If you have any concerns/objections to the policy which was outlined,
> > which includes a mandatory requirement to sign a contributor license
> > agreement and an option to also sign an assignment-like document based
> > on the FSFe FLA, please speak up this week.
>
> I've already said this before, but I guess I need to say it again:
>
>         If a contributor license is required to be signed, I'll have to
>         stop contributing to Gentoo.
>
> Other developers will be also affected, and you will find it hard to
> attract new developers who happen to work for companies that forbid
> their employees to sign these types of things (a _very_ common thing in
> the US, I have yet to work for a company in the past 20+ years that
> would have allowed this without going through the company's legal
> council for approval, a usually very difficult thing to achieve for a
> single developer.)

I am wondering if even things like Fedora Project Contributor Agreement[1] would
cause trouble for you and people in similar situation. I.e. FPCA is not a
copyright agreement as such, it's just setting default license for project for
contributions without license and provides a set of licenses that are OK for
project. In Fedora's case MIT was chosen as default for code and CC-BY-SA-3.0
for content. I am also assuming FPCA-style agreement wouldn't really solve
whatever issues are to be solved with optional assignment policy but who
knows...

I myself do not care much for copyright assignment policies even though I have
no legal problem with it per se. 

[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal:Fedora_Project_Contributor_Agreement


-- 
Stanislav Ochotnicky

PGP: 7B087241
jabber: stanislav@××××××××××.com