On Jul 1, 2004, at 03:12, Nick Phillips wrote:
On Wed, Jun 30, 2004 at 05:00:54PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:On Thu, Jun 10, 2004 at 04:51:06PM -0400, Michael Poole wrote:# 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.No, it's not. It's only saying that *if* you submit them for inclusion inthe work.
No, it says "when submitted for inclusion in the work." There is no "you" in there.
What if someone else submits my patch for inclusion? Like, I donno, the Debian maintainer?
I think it's different. Their intention is obvious -- to cover their arses against the possibility that someone submits a patch and then sues for a portion of their profits. If you don't want to pass ownership of your patch to them, don't send it in. This is merely an attempt to reduce the hassleof accepting patches.
If that is their intent, then they have botched it. This supposed copyright assignment doesn't work, at least in the US. If they are depending on this, then they are in trouble.
It seems reasonable to me.
I suggest that the following would be more reasonable, maybe even legal, and DFSG-free to boot:
Best Practical Solutions, LLC, will only accept for inclusion material for which it has been granted license to copy, modify, and distribute without restriction. If you submit material for inclusion, unless you note otherwise, you grant Best Practical Solutions, LLC a non-exclusive license to the above.
(Wording needs a little help, but you get the idea)