Re: [GNUnet-developers] copyright assignment

[Christian Grothoff]

On 12/23/2015 11:52 AM, LRN wrote:
> On 23.12.2015 12:09, Christian Grothoff wrote:
>> I would like to ask all contributors/developers to assign their
>> copyright on GNUnet code to "GNUnet e.V." (https://gnunet.org/ev)
>>
>> The reason is that situations continue to pop up where the ability to
>> dual-license some code would be helpful for the project (similar to how
>> we added GPL+eCos to GNU libmicrohttpd in the past).  If we had the
>> copyright with GNUnet e.V., then at least we had a relatively small
>> group (the annually elected "Vorstand") representing the developers in a
>> position of making decisions about dual-licensing.
>>
> 
> I will sign away my copyright to anything i've contributed to GNUnet (and,
> if you want, GNUnet-gtk and Extractor; by the way, what's the status of MHD
> in this regard? Though my contributions to MHD are very minor, so it
> shouldn't matter), on the condition that my contributions are dual-licensed
> under GPLv2+ (or GPLv3+, or v4+, or whatever) and LGPLv2.1+ (and i'll bump
> v2.1+ to v3+ or even higher as needed). The reason for this is that i've
> tinkered with the utility code (mostly its W32 side) a lot and i would
> really like to be able to re-use it elsewhere, as an LGPL library or in a
> project that is LGPL-licensed (in glib and GTK+, for example).

Ok, I guess I should clarify: I'm not asking you to exclusively assign
rights to GNUnet e.V., we merely need that GNUnet e.V. has 'shared'
ownership and thus the right to add additional licenses if necessary
(obviously there is no plan to abandon GPLv3+).  So you currently have
and would preserve the right to dual-license your contributions.

For example, you may have contributed code under GPLv3+ to GNUnet,
thereby granting everybody the right to use the code under GPLv3+. You
still inherently have the right to also license your code under say the
LRN-license. You should keep that right. What I'm asking for is that you
grant GNUnet e.V. the right to also dual-license in the future, so that
we could *also* dual-license.

So to start with: sure, go ahead and user your code elsewhere, my
request was independent of this. However, this request may actually help
your cause as well: say the code you want to re-use isn't 100% yours but
also is partially from Nils or other GNUnet hackers. With the change,
you could ask GNUnet e.V. to agree for the relevant parts of the code to
be re-licensed to be compatible with whatever other uses you have in
mind, instead of having to ask each individual contributor.

So what you are proposing is largely exactly what I want to make easier
with the proposed "assignment" (which may be an inexact term, as it is
really about granting GNUnet e.V. an additional right).

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature