Follow-up Comment #7, task #14621 (project administration): > Please study what is known about the different legal situations in > different countries.
I'm sorry, such a study would take too much time; could you point out the key differences relevant to our discussion? > There are in fact differences with respect to > what is allowable under copyright law, who has standing to seek > remedies, etc. Yes, but in most countries copyright law complies with the Berne Convention, and it says that the authors shall enjoy economic rights unless they transfer their rights to someone else. > Because it is released under the AGPL, the > software will always be free. > > Nothing in the policy I have identified conflicts with anyone's > ability to maintain the free status of a GPLed program (or library in > this case). After all, it is released under the GPL and thus by design > cannot be made "unfree". If "Us" decide to release a proprietary version of the library, the library in that version will be nonfree. The only people who could prevent this are contributors---but if they sign that agreement, they can't. > As for contributor agreements.org, their stated aim is the > following: "The goal of contributoragreements.org is to develop the > legal and technical infrastructure that will enable open source > collaborative projects to receive, Savannah doesn't support open source <https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html>, we support free software. These are different things <https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-open-overlap.html>. > the goal is to create an environment in which collaborative > projects can thrive People can collaborate in proprietary projects. Collaboration by itself is not our goal, our goal is freedom. _______________________________________________________ Reply to this item at: <http://savannah.gnu.org/task/?14621> _______________________________________________ Message sent via/by Savannah http://savannah.gnu.org/
