Subject: Re: FSB external software submission policies?
From: Lynn Winebarger <owinebar@free-expression.org>
Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 16:36:07 -0500 (EST)

On Thu, 25 May 2000 kmself@ix.netcom.com wrote:

> Good question.
> 
> A postcard policy establishes a written record of an agreement.  The
> agreement itself may be more or less than an assignment of copyright,
> and in my mind, would tend to be language along the lines of:
> 
>   a permanent, nonrevocable, worldwide, nonexclusive, royalty-free, grant
>   to use submitted code under the terms of the _____________________
>   license.
> 
> ...eg:  a licence grant, but not a transfer of copyright.
> 
> The postcard would also state that the contributor has rights to submit
> any third-party code, might cover issues of patents, etc.  There's
> decent language to filch from the Mozilla and other modern licenses.
> 
   My preference is for E on any software I would work on that was of any
importance to me.  While it does allow the assignee to make proprietary
versions available (and I probably would, as one way of funding more free
development), I don't view it in the same way as I view the MPL or any
other license that allows the original author a license to make
proprietary versions because it's completely voluntary (if you start with
something under GPL, that is).  Whereas such clauses inside licenses make
it non-voluntary if you want to make modifications.  Anyway, with (E), if
someone doesn't want to assign copyright, they can always make their own
distribution with their features.  Assuming they want the pain of
maintaining such things.

Lynn