3 ms·
I think the argument is as much about copyright assignment as it is about proprietary Ubuntu add-ons. Seriously, I couldn't care less if Canonical built a propr
by kijinbear 16y ago
I think the argument is as much about copyright assignment as it is about proprietary Ubuntu add-ons. Seriously, I couldn't care less if Canonical built a proprietary web service or two. After all, they've got to make money. But if they took my code and made it proprietary, I'd be very angry.
According to the author, this is exactly where Canonical is headed, because (1) Canonical demands contributors to assign copyright to them, (2) the terms of the copyright assignment offer no protection against Canonical making the code non-free in the future, and (3) Mark Shuttleworth seems to imply that making code non-free is exactly what he's going to do with code that was contributed by others.
- djacobs 16y agoTo clarify, are you saying that Canonical can take my code (which we supposedly jointly own) and re-write its copyright such that I can no longer use my code? Or does Open Core mean that they can take my code and use it for their own means without my permission if they so choose? (But I can continue using and developing mine myself.)