4 ms·
> it seems that the foundation simply considered the projects as "theirs" in some key ways This seems like the core issue. But I disagree it is a simple mista
by sbergot 5y ago
> it seems that the foundation simply considered the projects as "theirs" in some key ways
This seems like the core issue. But I disagree it is a simple mistake. "Oops. I simply considered your work as mine. Sorry my bad!"
- Master_Odin 5y agoAll of these projects joined the .NET Foundation though. Was there any contract they signed or agreed to as part of joining the foundation? What were the terms the orgs agreed to? I think we can all agree how the foundation handled this was really bad, but if you don't like having the risk of a foundation unilaterally doing stuff, don't join it a foundation?
- sbergot 5y agoJoining something does not mean automatically mean giving them authority on your work. Reading this page: https://dotnetfoundation.org/projects/submit https://dotnetfoundation.org/projects/submit > The .NET Foundation uses either an assignment model or a contribution model for on-boarding new projects. Under the assignment model, a project transfers ownership of the copyright to the .NET Foundation. Under the contribution model, a project retains ownership of the copyright, but grants the .NET Foundation a broad license to the project’s code and other intellectual property. I guess the impacted projects had not selected the "assignment model" in the first place.