On Mon, 2008-04-21 at 17:08 +0200, Stepan Kasal wrote: > Hello, > > On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 10:28:26AM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote: > > On Mon, 2008-04-21 at 10:13 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote: > > > On Mon, 2008-04-21 at 16:07 +0200, Stepan Kasal wrote: > > > > Why should people have this level of trust to Red Hat, Inc., whose > > > > stated goal is to generate maximal profit for the shareholders? > > > > > > Please show me where in the CLA / FAS we ask you to assign copyright to > > > Red Hat. Please. > > > > We do not ask contributors to assign copyright, but we ask them to give > > us a non-revocable license to do what we please with the code. > > > > The (C) is still fully in the hands of the author. > > that's exactly what I had in mind. > > The output is similar in both cases: > both the original author and "the Project" can do what they please > with the code. Both have the right to relicense it under GPLv7 or > BSD, or as a closed-source project. > > Which side retains the copyright is even less relevant than whether > the assignment is done on real paper. As I have pointed out elsewhere, this is not correct. The CLA does not supersede the licensing of your code. It only guarantees that you cannot stop any other recipient of your code through the Fedora Project from distributing your work under your licensing terms, or sublicensing it in a way that is compatible with your licensing terms. In other words, the free material you commit remains free. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
