On 7 Dec 2015, at 22:07, Matt Rice <[email protected]> wrote: > > and if they fail to live up to this obligation they have many > copyright assigners holding a contract the FSF would be in violation > of,
They never sent me the $1 that the copyright assignment form required that they pay (you can’t have a valid contract in some locales without something of at least token value being exchanged in each direction). A lawyer friend suggested that even if they were to pay it now (a decade late) that they’d find it quite difficult to enforce the copyright assignment if I contested it. That’s probably not a bad situation for us to be in. The copyright assignment is not intended for the FSF to be able to do things that the contributor didn’t want (and there’s a clause that would make that difficult anyway: you receive back an unconditional license to the code, so can release it under any other license that you choose as long as it carries the FSF copyright, so if all contributors to a project agreed then it would be entirely possible to create an MIT-licensed fork of an FSF project). The goal of the copyright assignment is for the FSF to have legal standing to sue for copyright infringement if someone else violates the license, and I doubt that any FSF contributor is likely to contest the copyright assignment while such a case is ongoing, if it’s in the interest of the FSF project in question. David -- This email complies with ISO 3103 _______________________________________________ Discuss-gnustep mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep
