Clarification of GPL

[Arnoud Engelfriet]

Ben Reser wrote:
> The problem here is exactly that.  Assignment is a double edged
> sword.  Assignment makes it easier for one individual to litigate
> against people who violate the license (which means violating the
> copyright).  But it also permits the assignee to change the license for future
> releases in any manner which they please.  Including proprietary
> licenses that perhaps the majority of contributors may not be inclined
> to agree to.

Correct. Personally, I would not assign my copyright to someone
else unless that person made a promise not to switch to a
proprietary license. 

> GNU projects require assignment of copyright to the FSF.  In this case
> it is very unlikely (arguably impossible) that code would be relicensed
> in any manner that is inconsistent with the GPL.  Though some people
> might even argue this point.

I'm not arguing it, but keep in mind the discussions we've seen
with the GFDL. The FSF believes this license is in accordance
with its principles, but many others disagree. We will have to
wait and see what happens with GPL version 3 (which is what the
FSF will relicense its code to once this license is written).

Arnoud

-- 
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com/
--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3