--On Tuesday, August 04, 2015 2:14 PM -0400 Brian Smith
<[email protected]> wrote:
It is natural for a lawyer to tell you to require lots of things to
protect whatever entity is paying them. That's defense-in-depth type
advice from them. However, lawyers do cost-benefit analysis based on the
goals you give them. If you tell them that avoiding CLAs is important
then they'll help you avoid CLAs, generally.
I'll second this -- At Zimbra, I went through this recently with our legal
team, as we are working to make it much simpler for the community to
contribute back. Initially the legal team proposed a CLA. I spent a
significant amount of time explaining why this was problematic, and they
eventually agreed that an IPR similar to the one I noted for OpenLDAP was
sufficient for our case. There of course could be reasons why a CLA would
be necessary for the OpenSSL project, but nothing comes immediately to my
mind as to why that'd be the case. CLA's just generally seem to be the
default starting position with legal teams, in my experience. ;)
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
--------------------
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
_______________________________________________
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
