| 1 |
On Fri, Oct 08, 2004 at 12:47:09PM +0100, Chris Bainbridge wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Thursday 07 October 2004 21:59, Donnie Berkholz wrote: |
| 3 |
> > In the |
| 4 |
> > second case, many devs signed an agreement already saying anything they |
| 5 |
> > wrote and added to Gentoo CVS is Gentoo's. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> This always seemed like an odd policy to me. Linus doesn't require |
| 8 |
> contributions to the kernel to have copyright assigned to him, and I don't |
| 9 |
> see why we need to. In fact, it works against our ability to enforce |
| 10 |
> copyrights. Suppose that some UK company starts breaking the copyright of |
| 11 |
> gentoo in some way, despite the fact that I have written ebuilds etc. I now |
| 12 |
> have no way of taking legal action against them, as I no longer have any |
| 13 |
> legal control over my contributions. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/copyright explains all of this. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Assigning copyright to Gentoo is quite necessary and will not be |
| 19 |
changed. This has all been discussed to death back when it was |
| 20 |
implemented. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
-- |
| 24 |
Jon Portnoy |
| 25 |
avenj/irc.freenode.net |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives