I'm joining this list just briefly to give some feedback and input on this thread on behalf of Software Freedom Conservancy, since we were mentioned multiple times in this thread. I suspect any conversation about how Conservancy and GCC might work together should be off-list or another list, and I have suggestions on that below. > > On 2021-06-01 07:28, Mark Wielaard wrote: > > > If we no longer want the FSF to be the legal guardian and copyright > > > holder for GCC could we please find another legal entity that performs > > > that role and helps us as a project with copyleft compliance? > On Tue, Jun 01, 2021 at 12:58:12PM -0700, Thomas Rodgers wrote: > > Personally, this would have been my preference. On Wed, Jun 2, 2021 at 4:18 AM Mark Wielaard wrote: > the Conservancy is happy to share their knowledge and discuss policy issues > with the GCC community if we decide we want their input. Jason Merrill replied: >> This seems to me a complement rather than an alternative; some Linux >> developers use the Conservancy copyleft services while contributing under >> the DCO, and some GCC developers could do the same. Jason, we agree completely that anything Conservancy might offer is a complement rather than a replacement for any structure that the GCC community already has or might want to build. For example, the Copyleft Compliance project that Mark mentioned is primarily designed for projects (e.g., BusyBox, Debian, Linux, Samba) that have diversely-held copyright. We provide logistical and coordination support for individuals who hold copyright (and help them figure out how to keep their own copyrights) and we also accept copyright assignment from those who prefer assignment. (As a reminder, Conservancy is not a law firm and we do not provide legal services and advice.) Also, note that both these models of copyright (assigning to a single entity, or having diversly held copyright among both entities and individuals) are compatible with the DCO in our experience. The DCO is an assent mechanism for licensing, and is orthogonal to the question of who holds the copyright. We would be glad to talk off-list with any GCC developers who have already decided to keep their own copyright about joining an enforcement coalition at Conservancy. The final note that Conservancy would like to share on-list is that through our ContractPatch initiative , we've been encouraging individuals to assure that their employment contract does permit them to keep their own copyrights. There are many reasons and advantages for individuals rather than their employers to take control of copylefted copyrights. We'd also be glad to discuss those policy benefits with anyone who is interested off-list. If you'd like to discuss any of these topics further with Conservancy, may I suggest the Contract Patch mailing list at: We definitely don't want to see the GCC mailing list derailed into discussing this possibly off-topic issue. -Pono from Software Freedom Conservancy