On Sun, 8 Jan 2012 22:15:03 +0100 Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: [...] > A possible way out, that I'm hereby suggesting, is to ask for the right > to re-license (instead of copyright assignment), but to ask a blanket > permission to re-license under any DFSG-free license the -www team will > see fit, now and in the future. I think that this is exactly what people opposing to copyright assignment want to avoid: giving permission to re-license under yet unknown terms. At least, I would *not* want to give blanket permissions to re-license. Not even to a non-profit organization. I have been disappointed by too many organizations, including non-profit ones (please don't get me started with listing specific examples, or I'll go on for days!). Moreover, "any DFSG-free license" is quite vague. Who decides which licenses are DFSG-free and which are not? It is well-known (at least among debian-legal regulars) that not everybody agrees with each other on the DFSG-freeness of a work. Countless examples could be made. Hence, having a promise to re-license under a "DFSG-free license" won't be enough to reassure people who have their own strong opinions on software freedom issues. -- http://www.inventati.org/frx/frx-gpg-key-transition-2010.txt New GnuPG key, see the transition document! ..................................................... Francesco Poli . GnuPG key fpr == CA01 1147 9CD2 EFDF FB82 3925 3E1C 27E1 1F69 BFFE
Attachment:
pgpuSa4ipFCc2.pgp
Description: PGP signature