[License-review] For Legacy Approval: LBNL BSD

[Brendan Hickey]

On Wed, May 22, 2019, 05:14 Henrik Ingo <henrik.ingo at avoinelama.fi> wrote:

>
> 2. License-as-contributor-agreement - [snip] when I add code to a git repo
> that has a BSD license, the code becomes also BSD licensed. This seems
> to me more like a clarification for use cases such as emailing a
> standalone patch without specifying a license.
>

Does this actually happen or is this the outcome that we want? Linux uses
the signed-off line in Git. On most rust repositories you'll see a language
to the effect that intentionally submitted code is Apache2 licensed.

During discussion of the C-FSL, someone pointed out that licenses are
insufficient for copyright assignment. What degree of affirmation do we
actually need from a submitter and can this be encapsulated in license
terms?

I agree with Pamela that the DOE guidance on this issue would be
illuminating.

Brendan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20190522/f2d0482c/attachment.html>