Re: [gentoo-project] call for agenda items -- council meeting 2019-04-14

[Michael Everitt]

On 09/04/19 22:53, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
> On 4/9/19 11:50 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 9, 2019 at 5:46 PM Kristian Fiskerstrand <k_f@g.o> wrote:
>>> If you are to provide anything related to this, I'd suggest also
>>> providing (i) a template copyright assignment document that assigns the
>>> copyright of any work to the foundation (will only be valid in countries
>>> where this is allowed, including US), and (ii) a policy document when
>>> the real name can be disclosed when needed (e.g in a court case
>>> disputing the copyright).
>>>
>> I think that this is starting to go off on a tangent, but a lot has
>> already been done on that front using the FSFe FLA as a starting
>> point.  I wouldn't suggest that somebody just create something from
>> scratch.  (And for those who are worried, the general thinking to date
>> is that it would be 100% voluntary.)
>>
>> That said, I really don't see how assignment helps here.  I suggest
>> taking any discussion around that to a separate thread unless there is
>> a clear tie-in, and I don't think this is a direction Council is
>> likely to go in anyway.
>>
> if the foundation approves pseudonym actors, an assignment from said
> person could have legal bearing but the identify wouldn't necessarily
> need to be immediately disclosed except an additional tag that the
> person has signed an assignment document. of course that presumes that
> the rationale for pseudonym isn't copyright avoidance to begin with.
>
Can I take the opportunity to point out, that if legalities are involved, I
am aware of several people who have taken the necessary procedures (and in
some cases, paid for the 'privilege') in order to use their chosen
pseudonym as a legal form of identity. In this case (IANAL), were the
courts to be instructed, I'm sure there would be valid justification for an
appropriate disclosure of required identity documentation to whatever party
it was deemed necessary.

Not all cases are simply ones where a person does not wish to use their
full given name, there are perfectly decent arguments for using a pseudonym
when there could be mild or severe ramifications if their true identity was
in the public domain. I'm thinking as obvious examples of those involved in
security/penetration work, where it may be required, and not simply
desirable to keep ones primary identity confidential. Are we really so
draconian to eliminate these (often very well-skilled individuals) for
making a specialist contribution to Gentoo Linux?!