On Nov 25, 10:38 pm, Jason Grout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> root wrote:
> > Standard industry practice on half a million open source projects
> > does not include an "I have signed over my copyright on this particular
> > patch" button. A general copyright judgement making the current practice
> > illegal would wipe out the free software movement overnight (except for
> > the FSF work, but they have paid lawyers).
>
> To my understanding, David is not asking people to sign over their
> copyright, only for the people to explicitly license their contribution
> (but retain copyright).
Yes, that is the exact intention, i.e. we do not want the copyright of
the Sage library to be held by some legal body, but that it remains
with the original author. The goal here is to implement a cleaner
process so that if we ever have to deal a legal issue we have
everything in writing. I cannot see how anyone could misunderstand the
license of the Sage library, but the law is not about obvious
correctness, but the letter and as we have all seen the current
Amercian legal system is a little different than one would expect,
i.e. the whole set of SCO lawsuits which were merit less from the get
go but dragged on to this day in court.
> -Jason
Cheers,
Michael
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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://www.sagemath.org
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
