4 ms·
FSF requires signing of a CLA. A CLA would let them change the license to whatever they want, just like these companies. Some people were not happy with GPL3 ye
by eikenberry 2y ago
FSF requires signing of a CLA. A CLA would let them change the license to whatever they want, just like these companies. Some people were not happy with GPL3 yet that didn't stop the FSF from changing the licenses on their software.
- teddyh 2y agoThe FSF does not require a CLA.
- eikenberry 2y agoIf they don't that is something new. Do you know when that started (or rather, stopped)?
- Conan_Kudo 2y agoThis stopped a long time ago. Many older GNU projects still have them, but newer ones are not required to have them. Some have even made their usage optional. An example of a project making it optional is GCC itself: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2021-June/236182.html https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2021-June/236182.html
- eikenberry 2y agoThat's great news! I've always been a big supporter of the FSF and that they stopped this toxic practice it awesome!
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- mschae23 2y agoThey explain that without it, they can't effectively enforce the copyrights on their projects: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-assign.html.en https://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-assign.html.en I highly doubt that the FSF, who developed the GPL licenses and values free software above anything else, would change the licensing of their projects like "these companies" do.