3 ms·

Can you please share why it is dangerous? If I release some code that I wrote myself, I own this code so I can always re release it in another strongly copy lef

by mcny 2y ago

Can you please share why it is dangerous? If I release some code that I wrote myself, I own this code so I can always re release it in another strongly copy left license if there is a defect in AGPL v3 or whatever.

bluGill 2y ago
If you sign a CLA you no longer own that code. Thus you trust who ever now owns the code to make decisions you agree with but have no way to assure that. depending on the terms you may own the code but it isn't a useful right as without everyone else including them you can't use your right to get a good license in place (one they disagree with so of course they won't)
- Benjamin_Dobell 2y ago
  I see you've repeated this in a few comments. Do you have a link? By the way, I'm not disagreeing. I'm Australian and curious about the US situation. My understanding was that whilst you can't assign copyright — insofar as you ought to always be able refer to yourself as the original author — you can provide an irrevocable license giving someone else the rights to reproduce, license and sublicense as they see fit.
  - KPGv2 2y ago
    The person you're responding to is wrong. CLAs are not transfers of copyright ownership or code ownership. They're only licenses (that's the "L" in "CLA") that grant the recipient a set of rights for how they are allowed to use your code that you retain ownership over.
- KPGv2 2y ago
  > If you sign a CLA you no longer own that code. This is untrue. The "L" in "CLA" means you are licensing the code to someone else, not transferring copyright. Edit: [Here](https://github.com/Decathlon/template/blob/master/contributor-licence-agreement.md https://github.com/Decathlon/template/blob/master/contributo...) is a sample CLA you see on Github. Inter alia, > You hereby grant to Decathlon and to recipients of software distributed by Decathlon a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable copyright license to reproduce, prepare derivative works of, publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, and distribute your Contributions and such derivative works. Observe you are licensing the code, not transferring copyright.
  - immibis 2y ago
    What's the practical difference? They still have the right to do anything they want with it.
  - bluGill 2y ago
    Those are the terms of that one CLA the terms of others can be different.

by mcny 2y ago

bluGill 2y ago

If you sign a CLA you no longer own that code. Thus you trust who ever now owns the code to make decisions you agree with but have no way to assure that. depending on the terms you may own the code but it isn't a useful right as without everyone else including them you can't use your right to get a good license in place (one they disagree with so of course they won't)

Benjamin_Dobell 2y ago
I see you've repeated this in a few comments. Do you have a link? By the way, I'm not disagreeing. I'm Australian and curious about the US situation. My understanding was that whilst you can't assign copyright — insofar as you ought to always be able refer to yourself as the original author — you can provide an irrevocable license giving someone else the rights to reproduce, license and sublicense as they see fit.
- KPGv2 2y ago
  The person you're responding to is wrong. CLAs are not transfers of copyright ownership or code ownership. They're only licenses (that's the "L" in "CLA") that grant the recipient a set of rights for how they are allowed to use your code that you retain ownership over.
KPGv2 2y ago
> If you sign a CLA you no longer own that code. This is untrue. The "L" in "CLA" means you are licensing the code to someone else, not transferring copyright. Edit: [Here](https://github.com/Decathlon/template/blob/master/contributor-licence-agreement.md https://github.com/Decathlon/template/blob/master/contributo...) is a sample CLA you see on Github. Inter alia, > You hereby grant to Decathlon and to recipients of software distributed by Decathlon a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable copyright license to reproduce, prepare derivative works of, publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, and distribute your Contributions and such derivative works. Observe you are licensing the code, not transferring copyright.
- immibis 2y ago
  What's the practical difference? They still have the right to do anything they want with it.
- bluGill 2y ago
  Those are the terms of that one CLA the terms of others can be different.