| 1 |
On Tuesday 12 April 2005 14:36, Chris Gianelloni wrote: |
| 2 |
> > Good question. I have to admit that I have no idea what the answer |
| 3 |
> > might be. I would think that the Foundation could, and probably should, |
| 4 |
> > engage in legal contracts on the behalf of Gentoo devs. The tricky part |
| 5 |
> > is that I'm not sure what, if any, ability the Foundation has to ensure |
| 6 |
> > that Gentoo devs live up to their part of the bargain. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> That's pretty much what I'm afraid of... |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> I know that I would like to pursue some possible arrangements with other |
| 11 |
> companies, especially as I am now getting quite close to producing some |
| 12 |
> fun GameCD images, and quite a few of the "free" games from standard |
| 13 |
> game production houses have restrictions on redistributing them in any |
| 14 |
> form other than their original. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
In principle such an agreement with e.g. ID software would mean that the |
| 17 |
foundation gets rights to create/distribute a cd under specific terms. One of |
| 18 |
those terms could be that the foundation delegates this allowed to delegate |
| 19 |
the actual creation to one of it's members. There is a big issue of liability |
| 20 |
however. The only solution I see is that there is some kind of "vault" that |
| 21 |
has restricted upload so that only foundation trustees can upload files there |
| 22 |
that would then be "distributed". Under such a system the foundation might be |
| 23 |
persuaded to accept liability, and could be protected against actions from |
| 24 |
it's members/developers. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
This does indeed impose an extra limitation on the developers, but I think |
| 27 |
that developers should be able to overcome this as the alternative is not to |
| 28 |
do this at all. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Paul |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
Paul de Vrieze |
| 34 |
Gentoo Developer |
| 35 |
Mail: pauldv@g.o |
| 36 |
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net |
Archives