3 ms·
GNU requires contributors (and maintainers) to assign copyright for non-trivial contributions. Benno doesn't want to do this, thus in GNU's eyes, he can't be th
by artlogic 10y ago
GNU requires contributors (and maintainers) to assign copyright for non-trivial contributions. Benno doesn't want to do this, thus in GNU's eyes, he can't be the maintainer.
You can argue (and it has been, to death) whether copyright assignment is right or wrong. When it comes to GNU projects, it's the rule of law. Based on mailing list posts and contribution history, it seems like the project had probably been in questionable GNU territory for awhile, given Benno's strong role and his unwillingness to assign copyright. I'm curious to see how the GNU project will respond.
- somethingsimple 10y agoDo you know what GNU's rationale is for requiring copyright assignment?
- artlogic 10y agoI'm no expert, but I believe the rationale is to simplify relicensing (GPLv2 -> GPLv3, for instance). I also think the papers disallow dual licensing the project with a proprietary license. There's more discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11953703 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11953703
- femto 10y agohttps://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-assign.en.html https://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-assign.en.html Because it makes it easier for them, as owner, to deal with copyright violations.
- GhotiFish 10y agoconversely, what's the argument against assigning copyright? I'm pretty sure the EFF can be trusted to keep nano open source.
- sundarurfriend 10y ago> I'm pretty sure the EFF Do you mean FSF here?
- GhotiFish 10y agooops. yah.
- mikegerwitz 10y ago> GNU requires contributors (and maintainers) to assign copyright for non-trivial contributions. It's up to the individual projects whether they want to assign copyright to the FSF.