Really? Wouldn't it be nice, then, if Digium explicitly stated that this was their intention, in their little agreements?
[snip]
That'd be the FSF calling this both "ethically tainted" and showing a loss
of "moral standing". I'd be happy to put it to them to see if there is a
more specific opinion covering the case where a copyright holder actually forces contributors to sign away their rights.
Digium doesn't force anyone to do anything. You are not required to have your patches put into Digium's source tree. If you don't like the terms of the license then you don't have to use Asterisk nor do you have to contribute to Asterisk.
Which of the two DIFFERENT Digium disclaimers do you have a problem with?
http://www.digium.com/disclaim.changes or http://www.digium.com/disclaimer.txt
Anyone that gets caught by suprize should have read the disclaimer more carefully.
_______________________________________________
Asterisk-Users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
