Re: request-tracker3: license shadiness
Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
> Michael Poole <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
>># Unless otherwise specified, all modifications, corrections or
>># extensions to this work which alter its source code become the
>># property of Best Practical Solutions, LLC when submitted for
>># inclusion in the work.
> This is a GPL-incompatible restriction. It is also non-free. Best
> Practical Solutions has not transfered its copyrights to *me*.
> They've given me a license under the GPL. That's all they can assume
> when I send them a patch for inclusion.
Is it still non-free even though you are not required to submit patches
to them for inclusion? If you opted to never send patches upstream, the
condition would not affect you at all. Note that simply distributing
the patches could not be considered as "submitting for inclusion in the
work"; you would have to explicitly submit a patch to upstream for
inclusion. Many upstream authors refuse to include submitted patches at
all, or require the copyright be explicitly assigned to them, or require
some other arbitrary condition; this one just states that they will take
submitted patches and assume they hold the copyright on them.
(I fully agree that the condition is GPL-incompatible, if it is in fact
a condition and not just a notice.)
- Josh Triplett