4 ms·
Copyright assignment is impractical, and a great way to eliminate outside contributions to a project.
by peripetylabs 14y ago
Copyright assignment is impractical, and a great way to eliminate outside contributions to a project.
- nullc 14y agoBut the polar opposite where companies like qualcomm are aggressively patenting techniques their employees 'contribute' to LLVM/CLANG with nary a suggestion of offering licensing that makes it lawful for anyone to use... thats okay? What the FSF does has its costs and limitations, but when the mobile patent war spreads to LLVM and renders it unusable except in the underground and by a few large patent mongers, we'll be thankful for the FSF's licensing stewardship on GCC and the rest of the GNU projects.
- justincormack 14y agoWell the Apache license protects against that too.
- DannyBee 14y agoLLVM's developer policy requires any developers contributing patented code to non-assert any patents with that code. This is particularly true if they work for companies. If you know of places where this is not occurring, or people are contributing code that is being aggressively patented, please email me personally and i'll make sure it gets taken care of. Also note that assignment does not fix anything related to patents. You seem to be confusing contributor agreements in general with copyright assignments.
- binarycrusader 14y agoI disagree. Copyright assignment is appropriate for some projects and not others. The mistake many people make is assuming that it should always happen or never happen. Some projects owe part of their success to copyright assignment, like Ogre3D.