Gentoo Archives: gentoo-trustees

From: Grant Goodyear <g2boojum@g.o>
To: gentoo-trustees@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-trustees] joint copyright agreement
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 00:57:33
Message-Id: 20050920005728.GB28520@dst.grantgoodyear.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-trustees] joint copyright agreement by Daniel Ostrow
1 Daniel Ostrow wrote: [Mon Sep 19 2005, 01:00:29PM CDT]
2 > On Mon, 2005-09-19 at 12:44 -0500, Deedra Waters wrote:
3 > > I'd like to try and keep things moving on this issue. So far, I've only
4 > > seen swift, corey, and dostrow's comments on this. Any other feedback on
5 > > this would be greatly appreciated. I'd like to see this done with by the
6 > > end of this year, and i think it's taken long enough. So, my question
7 > > is, should we go with this? If so, how do we pitch this to the devs?
8 > > Reguardless of what we decide on, we're going to get oposision to this.
9
10 Of course we will, but the best way to minimize that opposition is to
11 have the devs involved. My personal feeling is that I'm not
12 particularly opposed to it, but I'm also not entirely convinced that
13 it's necessary. I've yet to see anything that convinces me that Gentoo
14 needs something stronger than the model that the Linux kernel is using.
15 (Similarly, anybody know how the *BSDs handle copyright transfer, if at
16 all?) I'm willing to be convinced, but I haven't been yet. Perhaps
17 part of the problem is that I have a hard time coming up with evil
18 things that people could do that could cause serious harm to Gentoo
19 where copyrighted code is concerned.
20
21 In any event, my feeling is that the best solution for swaying devs is
22 to explain what the various options are, and why we feel that this one
23 is the best option, and then listen to comments.
24
25 > As far as I'm concerned opposition is 100% irrelevant. The job of the
26 > foundation is to protect the intellectual property of the Gentoo
27 > Project, the only way we can do this is to hold a copyright or joint
28 > royalty-free license on all pertinent works. We need to push this
29 > through ASAP. The text of the document addresses every concern except
30 > for the "I'm a minor and I can't sign it and my parents don't want to."
31 > concern.
32
33 Here I strongly disagree. If this copyright agreement is so important,
34 then we should be able to convince our devs of that fact, instead of
35 trying to "push it through".
36
37 > For all those who don't want to sign something because they feel that it
38 > is against the spirit of free software they don;t understand what is
39 > actually at stake. We are becoming more popular by the day and
40 > eventually we may have to defend something that is rightfully ours. As
41 > it stands we are on VERY soft ground if it were to happen tomorrow.
42
43 If _what_ were to happen tomorrow? Some at least semi-realistic
44 scenarios would be helpful here.
45
46 Also, is that sort of copyright agreement something that we can actually
47 enforce? What keeps a dev from starting up a project on berlios, for
48 example, with a group of other people who may or may not be devs,
49 writing a replacement for portage or genkernel or such, and then because
50 it's a particularly well-written piece of software having it be the
51 default special-magic-widget in Gentoo?
52
53 I don't mean to sound negative. I just assume that if I'm not yet
54 convinced entirely, then our devs might not be either.
55
56 -g2boojum-
57 --
58 Grant Goodyear
59 Gentoo Developer
60 g2boojum@g.o
61 http://www.gentoo.org/~g2boojum
62 GPG Fingerprint: D706 9802 1663 DEF5 81B0 9573 A6DC 7152 E0F6 5B76

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-trustees] joint copyright agreement Daniel Ostrow <dostrow@g.o>