From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20535 invoked by alias); 25 Apr 2010 16:00:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 20495 invoked by uid 22791); 25 Apr 2010 16:00:22 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from fencepost.gnu.org (HELO fencepost.gnu.org) (140.186.70.10) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sun, 25 Apr 2010 16:00:16 +0000 Received: from ams by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1O64Fh-0006gl-Tm; Sun, 25 Apr 2010 12:00:13 -0400 From: "Alfred M. Szmidt" To: Jonathan Corbet CC: rridge@csclub.uwaterloo.ca, gcc@gcc.gnu.org In-reply-to: <20100425093447.3aafc6c1@bike.lwn.net> (message from Jonathan Corbet on Sun, 25 Apr 2010 09:34:47 -0600) Subject: Re: Why not contribute? (to GCC) Reply-to: ams@gnu.org References: <20100424121223.B917D9C09@caffeine.csclub.uwaterloo.ca> <20100425093447.3aafc6c1@bike.lwn.net> Message-Id: Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2010 16:18:00 -0000 X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2010-04/txt/msg00710.txt.bz2 > Not much can be done to either of those, the copyright assignments are > necessary to keep GCC legally safe. Given that there are plenty of high-profile projects out there which seem to be entirely safe in the absence of copyright assignment policies, why, exactly, does GCC need one to be "legally safe"? I do not know what high-profile projects you are refering to, you will have to ask them why they think they can ignore a paper trail. Having one copyright holder solves many issues when enforcing copyright, you do not need to contact all parties. There is a short article on why you should assign copyright to the FSF at: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-assign.html