Requiring everybody to sign an ICLA is a bit much, and I would seriously discourage it. The ICLA required a two week review from the GC at my office before I could sign it (with you work for an entity like a university, IBM, Lucent, etc, where they own everything you do, there is a lot of hee-hawing to sign an agreement that forces them to allow me to donate work to somebody else).
That being said, having it signed for the winner should be expected, and I think it is pretty well spelled out in text we voted on. -Nick On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 12:09 PM, Doug Arthur <dougart...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Jan 8, 2012 10:02 AM, "Doug Arthur" <dougart...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Jan 8, 2012 9:32 AM, "Mihai Ene" <dkra...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > You cannot use an anonymous submission platform (like a blog, Twitter > or personal websites) because every user who submits materials needs to > sign the apache ICLA > > > Thus, i am afraid that the mailing list remains the only option so far. > > > > > > Mihai Ene > > > > > > > Good point, but that sucks. It's a good medium for exposure, and everyone > has access to that platform without extra sign up efforts. > > - Doug > > > > Including the mailing list, as private communication is discouraged. > Sorry if it was just an oversight. > > I have another thought about this. Why can't they use a public medium, and > if it's the one accepted, that one person signs an ICLA? Surely we're not > going to hamper entries by requiring all entrants to sign an ICLA up front? > Or, would it be acceptable to put it in the entry contest rules that their > submission constitutes the signing of the ICLA, like other contest states > they have rights to your submissions for promotional purposes? > > - Doug >
