<div dir="ltr">John,<div><br></div><div>Don't count on that. It is much more likely to be considered a compilation with individual copyrights, because the rights conveyed in the license text explicitly make it possible to create such a compilation and do not require the legal mechanism of a joint work. We also have legal precedent that there is consideration based on the author's recognition for <i>their </i>work.</div><div><br></div><div> Thanks</div><div><br></div><div> Bruce</div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 2:02 PM John Cowan <<a href="mailto:cowan@ccil.org">cowan@ccil.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 9:18 AM Elmar Stellnberger <<a href="mailto:estellnb@elstel.org" target="_blank">estellnb@elstel.org</a>> wrote:</div><div dir="ltr"><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
Someone who contributes to a little project probably maintained by no <br>
more than a single programmer will not care to sign a contributor <br>
license agreement if he applies changes to the software. The same <br>
applies in a more far-ranging form to distributors. I would not be able <br>
to use distributor´s fixes unless they would do me the favour to sign <br>
the CLA.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>As the maintainer of a few little projects, I take it that when someone sends</div><div>me a patch their intention is to become a joint author of the work and that</div><div>the contribution is licensed with the same license as the work originally had.</div><div>As a joint author, I can unilaterally change the license as long as I am willing to be</div><div>responsible to my co-authors for their share of the profits (which are zero</div><div>in any case).</div><div><br></div><div>-- </div><div><div>John Cowan <a href="http://vrici.lojban.org/~cowan" target="_blank">http://vrici.lojban.org/~cowan</a> <a href="mailto:cowan@ccil.org" target="_blank">cowan@ccil.org</a></div><div>Consider the matter of Analytic Philosophy. Dennett and Bennett are well-known.</div><div>Dennett rarely or never cites Bennett, so Bennett rarely or never cites Dennett.</div><div>There is also one Dummett. By their works shall ye know them. However, just as</div><div>no trinities have fourth persons (Zeppo Marx notwithstanding), Bummett is hardly</div><div>known by his works. Indeed, Bummett does not exist. It is part of the function</div><div>of this and other e-mail messages, therefore, to do what they can to create him.</div></div><div><br></div></div></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
License-review mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:License-review@lists.opensource.org" target="_blank">License-review@lists.opensource.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr">Bruce Perens K6BP - CEO, Legal Engineering<br>Standards committee chair, license review committee member, co-founder, Open Source Initiative<div>President, Open Research Institute; Board Member, Fashion Freedom Initiative.<br></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>