From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AD420138334 for ; Thu, 27 Sep 2018 12:43:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1178CE0897; Thu, 27 Sep 2018 12:43:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pf1-f170.google.com (mail-pf1-f170.google.com [209.85.210.170]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BFFC7E0878 for ; Thu, 27 Sep 2018 12:43:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pf1-f170.google.com with SMTP id d8-v6so1819072pfo.13 for ; Thu, 27 Sep 2018 05:43:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=ew8044JsXGF0IJN17jtXdtEflkxf/4RHeiPzx1BUrrc=; b=dFaky47R/6onNL3lqcM0PL5stYnoHhg1YsGeqlyqviEmyMNhwoyUAq6dO1/YN7nm+5 d3I6E7wHiiH6c7NnRJ5wO2eF/cJHKTnNyAIc6XVhu7IP7uS5UTIuLS7rSCt0YAhHvaXq vvyJFrocxBE9MiRsxlLHPaRm8EIMKAiAGxwiURxZFnZ5hhbleXU7KLrGkXJB5z9aRgz9 eOOwEe9gqFG79FHQ7AvPIo4ekMij1GVEXW7N8lUxJCo/ub7FoBMSqXbZucPznXotKXCJ mKrB2FkcJoUutjf9ey0elv0libTZ0Y6Ja7vkZhwX8lnw9bU4Wy5y3TNGGtzSYRg/qkzp 6CCQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ABuFfog9woA1yZpa6blF+ScOC2G7PmYKuRi6RAJtWjItmaPPU8i6BJRD Gts/F0NNtu7PczwBjaj3QBfP041kA/yyqz2sl+dOAw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACcGV62WCQmlkEo6BepGS3TdR6elgfoRmVg1hOceNp1Tz14z9QHqbrrotXWniGNXJ6yNZOvqlLPSCEbvniIvgBxonYU= X-Received: by 2002:a62:670a:: with SMTP id b10-v6mr11386787pfc.243.1538052189024; Thu, 27 Sep 2018 05:43:09 -0700 (PDT) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <23325.35685.793702.267278@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <23337.15822.698153.812236@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> In-Reply-To: From: Rich Freeman Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2018 08:42:57 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] [RFC] GLEP 76: Copyright Policy [v4] To: gentoo-project Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Archives-Salt: 9ec4eae8-9ecd-49c4-b328-80610f48ca6c X-Archives-Hash: 5ea444d99be7ccc98ac33c8b605d774a On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 8:00 AM NP-Hardass wrote: > > On 09/26/2018 03:25 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > Here is another small update of the copyright GLEP, resulting from a > > recent discussion on IRC. This is not a change of policy, but merely > > a clarification of the real name requirement: > > > > - The Signed-off-by line must contain the name of a natural person. > > > > - A copyright holder can be a legal entity (e.g., a company) in some > > jurisdictions. > > > > IANAL, but as per the Berne Convention, anonymous and pseudonymous works > are granted copyright protection. What's the rationale behind mandating > a real name? The DCO/GCO have nothing to do with obtaining copyright protection. This is always present if not waived. It is about showing due diligence in the event somebody claims that somebody ripped off their work and contributed it to Gentoo without authorization. If your real name is attached to a statement saying that you didn't steal the work, and you did steal the work, then they can go after you as well as Gentoo. That deters contributing stuff without checking on its legality. That same deterrence also helps show good faith on Gentoo's part. This is why organizations generally pursue these policies. If somebody violates a copyright anonymously, then they have no skin in the game. They can just disappear if anything bad happens. If a contributor isn't willing to stake their own money and reputation on the statement that something is legal to contribute, then why should Gentoo assume that they've put a lot of effort into the accuracy of that statement? -- Rich