Re: [gentoo-project] rfc: copyright attribution clarifications

[Rich Freeman]

On Sat, Nov 24, 2018 at 9:04 PM Sarah White <kuzetsa@××××××××××.ovh> wrote:
>
> On 11/24/18 8:37 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>
> So if it isn't meant to say that gentoo will be looking
> after the legal aspects of a FOSS/Libre-copyleft licensed
> package or document or tool, then what's the purpose to
> put gentoo's name on it?

You have to put somebody's name in the notice, and it was felt that
"Gentoo Authors" gets the job done.  "Gentoo Authors" is not Gentoo.
They are the authors contributing to the ebuild.

> There's some innuendo and/or implication that copyright
> holders who have their own name listed in a copyright
> notice are intending to do something other than participate
> in FOSS/Libre work, or perhaps may not truly wish to
> contribute in good faith.

Not at all.  The issue is that accumulating names creates clutter, and
create some sense that people who are named are doing more than people
who aren't named, which may lead to more people wanting to be named.

This is also why the policy allows for an AUTHORS file or use of a
VCS.  The intent isn't to deny people credit.  It is to provide credit
in a more reasonable manner vs having it spammed on the first lines of
every file in the tree, and try to create a culture where we don't
equate copyright notice with credit or property.

> Does gentoo have a legitimate reason
> to substitute a gentoo copyright notice in place of an
> otherwise valid notice?

The GLEP already allows existing works that have a non-Gentoo notice
to keep their notice and add "and others" if there are further
additions if they are brought into Gentoo from outside.  This doesn't
mean that we keep adding names to things.  This was intended for
things like eudev where we took an entire mature code body and forked
it.  This doesn't make as much sense for somebody contributing a 10
line ebuild to a repository containing thousands of ebuilds.

> Is there an intent to create a sort of gatekeeper role
> within the gentoo organization to request documentation
> if a contributor uses a non-gentoo copyright notice?

As the GLEP stands developers are already gatekeepers by virtue of
being the only ones with commit access, and being required to sign off
on the DCO.  This requires them to be aware of the copyright status of
the works they are committing, but we do not require the accumulation
of documentation.  However, the GLEP does not provide for multi-line
notices and the intent isn't to keep accumulating them over time.  The
intent was to be able to bring outside stuff in as-is as long as the
notices are reasonable and then just freeze them in time with "and
others" or simplify them with Gentoo Authors if appropriate.

-- 
Rich