Mike Kupfer a ?crit : > I'd expect the SCA to have more value, simply because it's been signed. > You may be right about the site TOU being unenforcible; I don't have any > knowledge in that area. But at some point this becomes a risk > management decision (i.e., the benefits of moving forward with the new > implementation versus the risk of problems cropping up as a result of > not having the SCA on file). Since it's Sun that would be taking the > risk, I think it's Sun's management that gets to make that decision.
I can already guess the lawyers' answer to that kind of question :-) I'm sure that keeping an exact track of who owns copyright on what will beat any other consideration. Such is today's world. > Laurent> And from the translation I just did of the new registration > Laurent> form, I understand a SCA will be required there too. > > Hmm. That's news to me. There, on page 6 and 7, properties #335 and #336: "Contributions to OpenSolaris need to be covered by a Sun Contributor Agreement (SCA)." "You will not be able to commit changes to any repository hosted on OpenSolaris.org unless you have a SCA on file." https://cti.sunvirtuallab.com/community/translations.jsp?token=319813607&taskId=1531986&projectId=24828&token=319813607 I *believe* that covers all kinds of contributions to the website (except comments and posts), as everything on it is part of a repository. Laurent -- / Leader de Projet & Communaut? | I'm currently on leave from \ G11N http://fr.opensolaris.org | Bull Services http://www.bull.com / FOSUG http://guses.org |
