AFAIK, the FSF has employed a bevy of lawyers who specialize in this sort of thing. The FSF's website links to the following: [EMAIL PROTECTED] "for questions about the GPL and free software licensing". I think that we should get some lawyers in on this discussion.
Before seeking any sort of advice, I like to collect a list of concerns so I know precisely what I want to ask, so I don't waste my own time, or my council's. I think we should do something along these lines. This is my impression of how things work: I can copyright my code, and license it under the GPL. At a later date, if I change the license, the public at large still has all the same freedom with the last version released under the GPL -- nobody can "hijack" it. Furthermore, if SAGE depends on my code intrinsicly, if I revoke the GPL for a future version, SAGE is still free to use the old code. I'm not too bothered by the idea of licensing my code to the foundation -- but then, I intend to take as much a part in the formation of it as I'm welcome to. I feel that a large part of the consitution should be dedicated to the permanence of freedom. I do trust William, and I believe that a benevolent dictatorship is a good model for an open source project. But there should be a mechanism such that he isn't by definition a dictator "for life" unless he's benevolent for life, too. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
