I think most GPL projects still use a CLA to help protect the project in
the case of future litigation. The Linux Kernel for example is GPL v2, but
still requires CLA language appended to each patch submission. Other
projects just have the developer submit a signed CLA a single time when
they make their first contribution to the project.
The CLA is not so much an attempt to state the the patch is using the same
license as the project, it's more to say the copyright belongs to the
project owner (Craig in this case), and not the developer who wrote the
patch.
David
On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 9:31 AM, Les Mikesell <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 11:02 AM, Mauro Condarelli <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > Hi Everybody,
> > it occurred to me there may be legal pitfalls (particularly in the
> States, but not only) concerning "Intellectual Property" of any
> contribution.
> >
> > I know several organizations (e.g.: Eclipse) require a declaration from
> each contributor stating:
> > 1) he is transferring Copyright of each and all patches to the Project.
> > 2) no other party (i.e.: his employer) has any claim on his
> contributions.
> > I know because I had to go into some loops to have some contributions
> accepted.
> >
> > Should we be concerned?
> > I know *noting* about USA Copyright laws (aside from the fact they're
> making many "attorneys" rich).
> > Is there someone knowledgeable here on the list?
> > Should we seek advice? (where? github? FSF?)
> >
> > We should fix this ASAP, before the coder base enlarges.
> >
> > Please give advice.
>
>
> Since the initial license is GPL v2, the only restriction is that any
> changes/additions must also be GPL or compatible (include source and
> not add additional restrictions). In some cases projects add a
> requirement to transfer ownership of contributions to the official
> version so that someone would have the authority to change the license
> on future versions if desired - but it may already be too late for
> that.
>
> --
> Les Mikesell
> [email protected]
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Mobile security can be enabling, not merely restricting. Employees who
> bring their own devices (BYOD) to work are irked by the imposition of MDM
> restrictions. Mobile Device Manager Plus allows you to control only the
> apps on BYO-devices by containerizing them, leaving personal data
> untouched!
> https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/304595813;131938128;j
> _______________________________________________
> BackupPC-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> List: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
> Wiki: http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
> Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
>
--
David Cramblett
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mobile security can be enabling, not merely restricting. Employees who
bring their own devices (BYOD) to work are irked by the imposition of MDM
restrictions. Mobile Device Manager Plus allows you to control only the
apps on BYO-devices by containerizing them, leaving personal data untouched!
https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/304595813;131938128;j
_______________________________________________
BackupPC-users mailing list
[email protected]
List: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki: http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
