> Relicensing code is tricky
> even when you can contact the original author.  If you can't, then
> you typically have to wait 75 years, which is a bit tricky.  One
> possible solution is that contributors agree that, in the event that
> they can't be contacted by some pre-arranged mechanism (e.g. mailing
> list, posting in a certain newspaper, whatever) for a year then the
> project gains the right to relicense any code they have contributed.
> I'm not entirely sure I'd be happy with this though (doing it myself,
> or expecting others to do it).

Which is most likely the very reason FSF requires copyright assignment
from all contributors to their projects?

I don't disagree with your suggestion of the idea of the pre-arranged
mechanishm, and it's probably less scary than a copyright assignment
requirement, but it seems like we could be wandering into dangerous legal
territory. Any code contributed to the project would then need a special
"This license expires if I can't be contacted" clause, I would think, so
we'd basically be inventing our own license and requiring that of each
contribution.

I think the best and easiest option is probably just to favor
BSD/ISC/MIT/public domain code, so that we don't have to worry (much)
about moving code around.


J.




_______________________________________________
Etoile-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/etoile-discuss

Répondre à