This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the glibc project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: malloc: performance improvements and bugfixes

So far I counted eight responses to the copyright assignment question.
A useful response, imo, would have included two things:
1. the actual text of the copyright assignment and
2. the FAQ answering most of my questions.

Lack of 1. means we waste time in a discussion without properly defining
what we are discussing.  It would be a miracle if that yielded useful

But the lack of 2. is that I find concerning.  Am I seriously the first
person that has reservations about signing a copyright assigment?  If I
am not and you have answered similar questions before, where did you
collect those answers?  Or if I am, does that mean I am the only nutjob
on the planet or am I an example of other people that don't contribute
because of copyright assignment?

Since there doesn't seem to be an FAQ, let me start one.

(Q) Why do you need copyright assignment?

(A) See

(Q) But there was successful litigation about the Linux kernel, which
    doesn't require copyright assignment.  Can you elaborate what those
    "very substantial procedural advantages" are so I don't have to take
    your word for it?

(Q) If I hold all rights for a particular piece of code and assign
    copyright to the FSF, under what terms can I use that code myself?

(Q) As the sole author of a piece of code, can I license that code under
    a different license like BSD, MIT, etc. after assigning copyright to
    the FSF?

(Q) The FSF as the sole copyright holder could relicense code under a
    proprietary license.  Are there mechanisms in place to prevent such
    a scenario beyond "trust us"?

I believe those to be valid questions and reasonable people may well
decide not to do copyright assigment without anwers to them.  If you
would rather reverse-engineer my code than answer legal questions, I can
completely understand that.  But it would be sad if the primary effect
of the FSF these days was to prevent people from contributing.


But this is not to say that the main benefit of Linux and other GPL
software is lower-cost. Control is the main benefit--cost is secondary.
-- Bruce Perens

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]