3 ms·

Hi! I want to respond to you personally, because we did have someone raise a bit of hell about our CAA for these reasons. They did not have any contributed code

Hi! I want to respond to you personally, because we did have someone raise a bit of hell about our CAA for these reasons. They did not have any contributed code, however. They were just a vocal third party. In the end, if they have opposition to the CAA, they don't sign it, and we make sure that we don't merge pull requests whose contributors have not signed the CAA. You have a moral opposition to the concept of the CAA or a CLA, and that's perfectly fine, it just means you will not be able to contribute to NodeBB. Unfortunate, but our butts are protected and your rights are not potentially infringed upon.

garmaine 6y ago
Why do you need a CAA/CLA? The common reason given is to have standing in an infringement dispute. But for that you just need some ownership, which you have. The reason for full ownership is to be able to relicense. That’s what I object to, and I don’t see why a project specific group with partial ownership like NodeBB needs that. What protections are you seeking? To be clear though, the context was that you found your own work had included the work of others and THEN went out and sought their copyright assignment. This isn’t someone seeking contribution. I fail to see why they would agree to that.