contribution agreements for open source projects

[John Cowan]

Alex Russell scripsit:

> And if your project is BSD-licensed and you *don't* do this, it's  
> unclear that you actually have the rights required to even make the  
> code available under the stated license.

How's that?  Everyone has the right to redistribute under the BSD.
As long as the contribution is BSD also, no problem.

> >The FSF wants copyright ownership so it can make such threats
> >effectively in pursuit of its special goals.
> 
> ...which it historically hasn't even done, even when there are clear  
> GPL violations. 

No lawsuits, but plenty of threats, unless you have reason to disbelieve
the claims in http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/enforcing-gpl.html .

-- 
John Cowan  cowan at ccil.org   http://ccil.org/~cowan
"The exception proves the rule."  Dimbulbs think: "Your counterexample proves
my theory."  Latin students think "'Probat' means 'tests': the exception puts
the rule to the proof."  But legal historians know it means "Evidence for an
exception is evidence of the existence of a rule in cases not excepted from."