From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.105.134.102] (helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Dn5MK-0002VH-7B for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 28 Jun 2005 01:57:56 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j5S1vTOk025511; Tue, 28 Jun 2005 01:57:29 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j5S1vSVx027124 for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2005 01:57:28 GMT Received: from c-67-171-150-177.hsd1.or.comcast.net ([67.171.150.177] helo=[192.168.1.106]) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.43) id 1Dn5MG-0007Iu-RL; Tue, 28 Jun 2005 01:57:52 +0000 Message-ID: <42C0AEA1.7050108@gentoo.org> Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2005 18:57:53 -0700 From: Donnie Berkholz User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (X11/20050411) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-trustees@gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Sven Vermeulen CC: gentoo-trustees@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-trustees] copyright stuff References: <20050627201759.GA9776@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <20050627201759.GA9776@gentoo.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.90.0.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 4e249b19-cd93-4ec7-8e88-1a894ebd4037 X-Archives-Hash: 4fb9b7a18c2895c6094f1b077d07aee1 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Sven Vermeulen wrote: > I still feel that a copyright assignment is the best option if we can not > have the copyright available for both parties (i.e. both the developer /and/ > the foundation can take action against copyright violations). Having dual > copyrights is more troublesome than full copyright assignment, since full > copyright assignment is probably listed in all relevant laws (Copyright Act > in the USA, Auteursrecht in Belgium, etc.) while dual copyright is more > something exotic. > > Another possibility is an exclusive license. With an exclusive license, the > Foundation can protect the code (take appropriate measures, ...) while the > original author still retains the copyright. The drawback is that the > original author can not use the code beyond what the Foundation and the > contract (= the license) sais ("exclusive" license). How about this: By default, everybody signs off to one of the above. Strong objectioners have the option of signing a nonexclusive license instead. Thanks, Donnie -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCwK6hXVaO67S1rtsRAuPLAJ0dEHApkA5kRjnfBrMhEM7XQulu5ACfdLED RjIK0rgPDUKHjhbJ49sWw7c= =e0lP -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- gentoo-trustees@gentoo.org mailing list