Re: [gentoo-project] rfc: copyright attribution clarifications

[Ulrich Mueller <ulm@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1598 bytes --]

>>>>> On Sat, 24 Nov 2018, Alec Warner wrote:

> I think it is an entirely reasonable position to do the following:
>  - Not accept the SEI notices because we do not understand the grounds on
> which they are added.
>  - Ask SEI for a rationale for what the notices are meant to convey, so we
> can decide if we can support whatever that use case is; maybe its something
> we didn't consider in the GLEP.

Hm, shall we make this an agenda item for the next Council meeting?

> I don't think its reasonable to say they are mean shitheads; because the
> fact is we don't know what they want to accomplish with the notices.
> My concern is that they may later provide a reasonable use case for the
> notices and the council will just say 'well that use case is stupid because
> Sony is stupid'; because that is the message many members of the council
> are currently communicating. Why would Sony even bother if the narrative is
> the Council won't listen anyway? It looks like a waste of their time.

In the first place, they should have raised their concerns while GLEP 76
was in the making, not after it went through the approval process with
Council and Trustees. Our proposed policy was posted on the mailing list
for review, even with several iterations. Plus, they were happy with a
single line notice before, so not accepting it any longer looks like an
arbitrary move.

> I think the above proposal puts the ball clearly in SEI's court; if they
> want the notices accepted they can provide a memo detailing why. If they
> don't care, they can drop the notices or stop committing.

+1

Ulrich

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 487 bytes --]