Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Hailey (hailey@hails.org)'s status on Monday, 26-Feb-2024 17:38:12 JST Hailey

   nothing ruins my motivation to send fixes to your open source project more than to ask me to sign a CLA for it.

   sorry guys I'm just not that interested in reviewing a legal contract just to improve your software for free

   • Embed this notice
     Rich Felker (dalias@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Feb-2024 00:23:04 JST Rich Felker

     in reply to

     • jacqueline 🌟
     • Troed Sångberg

     @troed @jacqueline @hailey The intended power dynamic when we (FOSS community) interact with FOSS under a commercial umbrella is that we are the ones with the power to rugpull. When the shareholders try to do shit we don't approve of, we fork and leave them holding a silly brand name.

     Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell: likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     Rich Felker (dalias@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Feb-2024 00:23:05 JST Rich Felker

     in reply to

     • jacqueline 🌟
     • Troed Sångberg

     @troed @jacqueline @hailey Even if they do sign a CLA, that does nothing to mitigate risk that the code is plagiarized and they lack any rights to license it to you. So CLA doesn't even CYA. It just keeps the VCs happy knowing they can rugpull the FOSS community.

     Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell: likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     Rich Felker (dalias@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Feb-2024 00:23:06 JST Rich Felker

     in reply to

     • jacqueline 🌟
     • Troed Sångberg

     @troed @jacqueline @hailey If the change is trivial, there is no copyright risk anyway.

     If the change is significant, I hope you trust the author, because risks of them introducing harm thru code are much greater than risks of copyright shenanigans. You have evidence of their intent to put the code in project X under license Y. If you think that's not enough, have them state it explicitly. This does not need a lopsided contract, especially not one that gives you power to relicense proprietary.

     Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell: likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     Troed Sångberg (troed@masto.sangberg.se)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Feb-2024 00:23:08 JST Troed Sångberg

     in reply to

     • jacqueline 🌟

     @jacqueline

     Yes? What else exists?

     @hailey

   • Embed this notice
     jacqueline 🌟 (jacqueline@chaos.social)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Feb-2024 00:23:10 JST jacqueline 🌟

     in reply to

     • Troed Sångberg

     @troed @hailey "the only possible solution"

   • Embed this notice
     Troed Sångberg (troed@masto.sangberg.se)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Feb-2024 00:23:11 JST Troed Sångberg

     in reply to

     @hailey Well, it actually isn't "for free" if the fix would include code to be copyrightable. That would then place a future burden on the open source project.

     Also: Investigating whether the fix is copyrightable or not takes time (= cost)

     Thus, the only possible solution an open source project has is to ask contributors to sign a CLA.

   • Embed this notice
     Hailey (hailey@hails.org)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Feb-2024 00:24:41 JST Hailey

     in reply to

     • Tursiae

     @tursiae totally, and it's just not how the social contract works. I am giving something to you out of my own kindness, take it or leave it, but placing some burdensome task on me is the exact opposite of reasonable

     Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell: likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     Tursiae (tursiae@meow.social)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Feb-2024 00:24:43 JST Tursiae

     in reply to

     @hailey So much this. I don't care what OSS license the fix is under; BSD, GPL, whatever, but I'm not gonna assign my copyright to someone else.

   • Embed this notice
     Mans R (mansr@society.oftrolls.com)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Feb-2024 00:26:32 JST Mans R

     in reply to

     @hailey The beauty of it is that if you send patches anyway, they'll be forced to do it themselves differently or let the bug go unfixed.

     Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell: likes this.