[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [GSWHackers] Re: OGo/GNUstep cooperation Re: Re[2]: Frameworks
From: |
Marco Scheurer |
Subject: |
Re: [GSWHackers] Re: OGo/GNUstep cooperation Re: Re[2]: Frameworks |
Date: |
Thu, 11 Mar 2004 12:13:21 +0100 |
On Mar 8, 2004, at 3:08 PM, NeXT wrote:
I cannot help but to ask this question :-) Helge, do you or your
comapny have any problem
in licensing or donating SOPE to FSF ? If so, we have to find another
way(though I prefer
first method be possible...). I think SOPE to FSF will solve most
problems during this
discussion. (I'm afraid that this is rather impossible, so the
discussion comes here...)
Why is assigning copyright to the FSF such a big deal? FYI, the
copyright for the Linux kernel source code is not assigned to the FSF,
and it does not seem to be a problem to hundreds of Linux contributors
or, as users, to many GNUSTEP developers.
I could understand that if someone contributes to SOPE, he could ask to
keep the copyright on his contribution (or maybe assign it to the FSF)
if he doesn't want to give a blank check to Skyrix or Helge, but
otherwise I don't understand the fuss. I haven't seen that Helge asked
that contributions should be copyrighted by Skyrix (on the contrary,
his position is that you cannot transfer copyright).
As the original author of the kit, Skyrix is certainly entitled to keep
it's copyright, which means they could decide to distribute the same
code to someone else with a different license, but it does not diminish
your rights under the GPL. And of course, if you make an important
contribution to SOPE, and you keep your copyright on it (or give it to
the FSF if you wish) then you would have leverage on how the whole kit
is distributed if it is to include your contribution.
The only advantage of assigning the copyright to the FSF, is that the
FSF is supposed to be better prepared to enforce this right than the
original author or a random distributor. Let me just point out that
apparently Fyodor has been able to get SCO to stop distributing nmap,
while the FSF has not left a finger yet.
(IANAL, just my 2 cents)
marco
Marco Scheurer
Sen:te, Lausanne, Switzerland http://www.sente.ch
- Re: [GSWHackers] Re: OGo/GNUstep cooperation Re: Re[2]: Frameworks integration, (continued)
- Re: [GSWHackers] Re: OGo/GNUstep cooperation Re: Re[2]: Frameworks integration, Manuel Guesdon, 2004/03/02
- Re: [GSWHackers] Re: OGo/GNUstep cooperation Re: Re[2]: Frameworks integration, Helge Hess, 2004/03/02
- Re: [GSWHackers] Re: OGo/GNUstep cooperation Re: Re[2]: Frameworks integration, Alex Perez, 2004/03/03
- Re: [GSWHackers] Re: OGo/GNUstep cooperation Re: Re[2]: Frameworks integration, Fred Kiefer, 2004/03/03
- Re: [GSWHackers] Re: OGo/GNUstep cooperation Re: Re[2]: Frameworks integration, Helge Hess, 2004/03/03
- Re: [GSWHackers] Re: OGo/GNUstep cooperation Re: Re[2]: Frameworks integration, Pete French, 2004/03/04
- Re: [GSWHackers] Re: OGo/GNUstep cooperation Re: Re[2]: Frameworks integration, Gregory John Casamento, 2004/03/08
- Re: [GSWHackers] Re: OGo/GNUstep cooperation Re: Re[2]: Frameworks integration, Helge Hess, 2004/03/08
- Re: [GSWHackers] Re: OGo/GNUstep cooperation Re: Re[2]: Frameworks, NeXT, 2004/03/10
- Re: [GSWHackers] Re: OGo/GNUstep cooperation Re: Re[2]: Frameworks, Helge Hess, 2004/03/10
- Re: [GSWHackers] Re: OGo/GNUstep cooperation Re: Re[2]: Frameworks,
Marco Scheurer <=
- Re[2]: [GSWHackers] Re: OGo/GNUstep cooperation Re: Re[2]: Frameworks integration, Manuel Guesdon, 2004/03/10
- Re[2]: [GSWHackers] Re: OGo/GNUstep cooperation Re: Re[2]: Frameworks integration, Manuel Guesdon, 2004/03/04