On Wed, 2006-11-29 at 15:33 +0100, Thilo Pfennig wrote:
Matthew Miller schrieb:
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2006 at 01:17:57PM +0100, Thilo Pfennig wrote:
>> But the wiki is not. And as summit is over no irc contributions. I know
>> that I may post emails to most fedora lists, but thats not much. I can
>> also do this on every open mailing lists for any proprietary software.
> Sign the CLA.
So everybody in the world should sign the CLA and give Red Hat
non-exclusive rights to do with the content what they want? I would not
use a license if this would be my direction. In fact if we do this with
software (do all software developers have signed the CLA?) this would in
fact mean that Red Hat has the choice to relicense every bit that is
contributed and distribute it proprietary. You mighth say: They will
not. But as Red Hat does not trust me as a free man if I do not sign a
CLA, why should I trust Red Hat?
Please read the CLA. Section 2, the Contributor Grant of License, is a
grant to both Red Hat and to _every_ Fedora user. It states that you
are making your works available to the above-mentioned parties in
perpetuity, and that you have the right to do so (patent and otherwise).
It does _not_ specify the license under which you do so, merely that it
must have the properties of allowing derivative works, public display
and performance, and distribution; Red Hat, and the Fedora Project, must
still respect the license of the work being contributed. Neither is it
a statement of assignment of copyright.
It's really just a statement of good faith, written in the same
reciprocal spirit as GPLv2, and it explicitly does not grant Red Hat any
special exclusive powers. I appreciate your caution in legal matters,
but you're attributing properties to the CLA that just aren't there.