Re: Copyright resolution

[Gary Thomas <gary@mlbassoc.com>]

On Tue, 2003-03-25 at 09:38, John Dallaway wrote:
> Jonathan Larmour wrote:
> 
> > So as I see it, and from what y'all have already indicated preferences
> > for, there are essentially two conclusions:
> >
> > a) Create our own "eCos Foundation" whether not-for-profit or otherwise,
> > and possibly then try to do a deal with Red Hat.;
> > or
> > b) Drop the copyright assignment requirement for patches entirely.
> 
> I don't see option (a) as realistic unless someone is prepared to pay the 
> legal fees or we can find sponsorship. These fees are likely to be 
> considerable given the unusual nature of the proposed foundation.
> 
> I think option (b) is the most realistic way forward and agree with Jifl 
> that this should definitely be accompanied by a company disclaimer process. 
> In fact, we should maintain a database detailing all code contributions, 
> company names, contact details, etc.

After more thought, I tend to agree, although I would like to
explore the FSF option (which could go hand-in-hand with this 
change).

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------
Gary Thomas                 |
MLB Associates              |  Consulting for the
+1 (970) 229-1963           |    Embedded world
http://www.mlbassoc.com/    |
email: <gary@mlbassoc.com>  |
gpg: http://www.chez-thomas.org/gary/gpg_key.asc
------------------------------------------------------------