On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 6:39 PM, Ken Wesson <kwess...@gmail.com> wrote: > It says "Transfer of a right on a nonexclusive basis does not require > a written agreement". As long as Clojure gets a worldwide, > nonexclusive, royalty-free license with EPL-compatible redistribution > terms, that ought to be good enough, shouldn't it?
That made me pull up the Clojure CA and it is worded in terms of 'non-exclusive' so it would seem that a written agreement is not actually _required_ by US law, at least insofar as the copyright portion is concerned. The CA also covers patents and some other things and I'm not inclined to go research that aspect of law. Frankly, I think more time is spent discussing the pros and cons of the CA than would actually be spent just filling it in and mailing it off to Rich... If someone really feels signing and mailing an agreement is "too much work" then they don't seem very committed to contributing, IMO. It's really not much of a hardship is it? My signed CA is on file with Rich so, for me at least, it's a moot point :) -- Sean A Corfield -- (904) 302-SEAN Railo Technologies, Inc. -- http://getrailo.com/ An Architect's View -- http://corfield.org/ "If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive." -- Margaret Atwood -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
