On 11/03/13 06:30, Christopher Schmidt wrote:
Detlef Steuer <detlef.ste...@gmx.de> writes:
But: The papers the FSF asked you to sign were constructed for exactly
this case I assume.
That's not right.
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-assign.html
I am not a copyright lawyer. So is everyone else subscribed to this
list. The FSF's copyright clerk should assist on this issue.
That may be why the FSF *wants* copyright, but that hardly matters. The
fact is (I presume) that copyright *was* assigned to the FSF and
therefore the FSF is the entity that can determine the rights of copy,
distribution, etc of the code.
This is very common in publishing: the author is asked to assign
copyright to the publisher, and it is then the publisher who has rights
formerly held by the author.
Cheers,
Alan
#+BEGIN my2cents
If Jambunathan does not want code he wrote to be part of Org any more,
I'd respect his wish. At first sight this is a loss for Org. This
does not need to be the end, though. GSoC is coming up, rewriting
specific exporter look like great projects.
Jambunathan did not mention what is going to happen to his code.
Jambu, are you going to maintain the code you wrote separately. If so,
is code free, libre and upwards compatible to future Org releases?
#+END
A long yet somewhat relevant read:
https://lwn.net/Articles/529522/
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.encryption.gpg.gnutls.devel/6465
Christopher
--
Alan L Tyree http://www2.austlii.edu.au/~alan
Tel: 04 2748 6206 sip:172...@iptel.org
