Войти в систему

Home
    - Создать дневник
    - Написать в дневник
       - Подробный режим

LJ.Rossia.org
    - Новости сайта
    - Общие настройки
    - Sitemap
    - Оплата
    - ljr-fif

Редактировать...
    - Настройки
    - Список друзей
    - Дневник
    - Картинки
    - Пароль
    - Вид дневника

Сообщества

Настроить S2

Помощь
    - Забыли пароль?
    - FAQ
    - Тех. поддержка



Пишет LWN.net ([info]syn_lwnheadline)
@ 2021-07-01 17:25:00


Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Kuhn: It Matters Who Owns Your Copylefted Copyrights
Bradley Kuhn has posted a lengthy missive on the Software Freedom Conservancy blog about the hazards of distributed copyright ownership.

As a result, in debates about copyright ownership, discussions of what policy contributors want regarding the fruits of their labor is sadly moot. Without a clear, organized mitigation strategy to assure that FOSS contributors keep their own copyrights, a project (such as GCC or glibc) that switches from a standing “(nearly) all copyrights assigned to a charity” model to a plain Developer Certificate of Origin (DCO) or naked inbound=outbound contributor arrangement will, after a period of years, mostly likely to have copyrights that are primarily held by the employers of the most prolific contributors, rather than by the contributors themselves.


(Читать комментарии) (Добавить комментарий)