dotgnu-general
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[DotGNU]Licensing and copyright assignment in DotGNU


From: David Sugar
Subject: [DotGNU]Licensing and copyright assignment in DotGNU
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 09:31:16 -0400
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-9mdk i686; en-US; m18) Gecko/20001013

In any GPL project it is nessisary to consider and address the issue of copyright assignment. Copyright assignment is particularly essential because the GPL operates thru copyright law, not contract law. If there is no clear or clean copyright holder to the work in each part and in whole, then there is no party that can cleanly enforce misuse of the GPL.

The copyright holder must of course be a trusted authority. They often get all the responsibilities for dealing with copyright issues and none of the benefits.

Our choice I think is to have copyright assignment either to FD or the FSF. In that the FSF is already in place and has the infrastructure to handle this, it would seem the logical entity to use for this purpose.

Copyright assignment is done as a written document, and the FSF does have copyright assignment forms. I believe we should do this for each package that is initiated. Everyone working on the packages will have to sign and return a copyright assignment form for that to work.

Being a GNU package does not actually require copyright assignment to the FSF per say, but it does generally require some clean and clear copyright assignment to some individual, organization, or entity that can be trusted. I am not speaking authorativily about the FSF in this regard, but only expressing my best understanding of their policy. Certainly doing copyright assignment to the FSF is simpler and more convenient than doing it with another entity.

There are probably others who can much better explain copyright assignment and how the GPL works in regard to copyright law than I could. I wanted to make sure everyone on this and the main free developers list are at least aware of the issues involved in copyright and copyright assignment in regards to free and copyleft software, and in particular in regard to packages that may become GNU packages. Since rms follows the main list, I am certain he will correct any inaccuracies I may have made here.

David




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]