Russ Allbery wrote:
> Jeff Garzik <[email protected]> writes:
>
>
>>If you keep a copy locally, sure. But the upstream sources, i.e. what's
>>important, you lose rights to even though you may have contributed
>>substantial amounts of code. IOW if binutils goes off in a direction
>>you don't like, for example the FSF changes the license from GPL to
>>Microsoft EULA, you don't have any say in the matter whatsoever. You're
>>left with a code fork based on the last GPL sources and/or the patches
>>you've kept locally.
>
>
> Jeff, have you read an FSF copyright assignment?
yes, many times thank you.
> It doesn't just say "I give you all rights to my work so that you can do
> whatever you want with it."
Indeed. It continues on, to make legally-questionable assertions about
source code availability and royalties, that one IP lawyer I spoke with
informally thinks is complete bunk. I would like to see "The Foundation
promises..." to hold up in any court.
Jeff
Jeff Garzik <[email protected]> writes:
> Indeed. It continues on, to make legally-questionable assertions about
> source code availability and royalties, that one IP lawyer I spoke with
> informally thinks is complete bunk. I would like to see "The Foundation
> promises..." to hold up in any court.
Ah, so rather than it just not addressing any of the stuff you're talking
about, it *does* address it but you think that the way it does is legally
questionable. Thank you, that's much clearer. I wish you would have said
that in the first place.
--
Russ Allbery ([email protected]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>