On Mon, 26 Apr 2010 12:50:14 -0400 "Alfred M. Szmidt" <a...@gnu.org> wrote:
> If with kernel you mean Linux, then they require you to agree to an > type of assignment (though not in paper form), same for git. No. What you agree to is the developers certificate of origin (DCO), which says you have the right to contribute the code to the kernel. No copyright assignment takes place. Trust me, I have thousands of lines of code in the kernel, and the copyright remains mine. > Apache requires an assignment as well from the looks, see > http://www.apache.org/licenses/icla.txt Did you read it? It's not a copyright assignment agreement. > I do not know about MeeGo. http://meego.com/about/licensing-policy MeeGo project will neither require nor accept copyright assignment for code contributions. The principle behind this is on the one hand to avoid extra bureaucracy or other obstacles discouraging contributions. On the other hand the idea is to emphasize that contributors themselves carry the rights and responsibilities associated with their code. > Regarding BusyBox, it was Erik Anderseen who filed suite (via SFLC), > but he can only file suite for the code he holds the copyright over. > If a company manages to remove the code he holds copyright over, and > nobody of the other copyright holders wish to sue, then the company > can go about violating the license. If the copyright holders don't wish to sue, then, one presumes, they are not unhappy about the use of their code? Anyway, I've probably irritated this list more then enough already; I'll stop now, sorry for the noise. jon
