Re: [SLUG] Re: Re: Copyright assignment + the GPL [Was: Streaming media servers]

[QuantumG <qg@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Jeff Waugh wrote:

> You're making a general statement (that copyright assignment is bad), but
> hanging on to a specific example [1]. Look at other projects that require
> copyright assignment, such as Evolution, and see whether the points you make
> apply equally.
>  

> From the Evolution FAQ:

  http://forge.novell.com/modules/xoopsfaq/?cat_id=30%23q60

  What do I get for my copyright assignment?

  In exchange for your grant of copyright, Novell does two things. 
  First, we promise to use the GPL or another Debian-endorsed Free 
  license for your code (although we may also grant other licenses on 
  other terms).

  Second, we grant back to you as author all your original rights to 
  do what you want with your code, without any fees or
  restrictions  from us. This includes your right to relicense under 
  whatever terms you may desire. That is, your grant lets Novell use
  your code, but you keep your original ownership rights as well.

So in exchange for your copyright you get a license you wouldn't need if 
you didn't give them your copyright and you get the honour of Novel 
being able to relicense your code as they see fit (i.e., you get to 
watch them take away people's freedom using your work).  What a deal!

The only reason they can do it is because they control the repository.  
If GNU Arch was more widely used people wouldn't mind getting lots of 
patches from lots of different places and this kind of centralization 
wouldn't be something these companies could capitalize on.

Trent