Die 10. 03. 14 et hora 11:10:23 Florian Weimer scripsit: > > The only reason why Bacula is able to pull off the proprietary > > version is that parallel to the FLA assigning the right to FSFE, all > > the contributors also signed a CA to Kern. > > I expect that most "Beneficiaries" who have signed FLAs with FSFE > would be rather surprised that "Bacula Systems S.A. respectively Kern > Sibbald has the right to use, reproduce, modify, redistribute and make > available software based on [their] contributions and resulting > software 'under other licenses' including under a proprietary license > as the Bacula Enterprise Version, in accordance with Section 3 (2) of > the FLA.".
As already stated. He’s able to do that because these people have also signed a separate Copyright Assignment with which they assigned their copyright to directly to Kern. Please do not confuse the FLA that people have signed with FSFE and the CA that they signed with Kern (that happens to bear the name “FLA”). Rest assured we’re working hard on fixing this situation. If you have any internal information I should be aware of, please do let me know. cheers, Matija -- Legal Coordinator & Coordinator Slovenia Free Software Foundation Europe www: http://fsfe.org █▉ || priv. www: http://matija.suklje.name e-mail: [email protected] █▉█▉█▉ || priv. e-mail: [email protected] xmpp: [email protected] ▉▉ || priv. xmpp: [email protected] sip: [email protected] || gsm: +386 40 690 890
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list [email protected] https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
