From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+willy=40w.ods.org@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id <S263320AbSJTRjf>; Sun, 20 Oct 2002 13:39:35 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org
	id <S263321AbSJTRjf>; Sun, 20 Oct 2002 13:39:35 -0400
Received: from parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk ([195.92.249.252]:20747 "EHLO
	www.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id <S263320AbSJTRje>;
	Sun, 20 Oct 2002 13:39:34 -0400
Message-ID: <3DB2EBCD.8090405@pobox.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 13:45:49 -0400
From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.1) Gecko/20020826
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ben Collins <bcollins@debian.org>
CC: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Bitkeeper outrage, old and new
References: <20021014170248.A19897@infradead.org> <E181WHl-00010N-00@fencepost.gnu.org> <20021015193138.A4010@infradead.org> <200210161856.g9GIu57t013710@santafe.santafe.edu> <20021016201328.A24882@infradead.org> <E1832Lh-0004xH-00@fencepost.gnu.org> <20021019161201.A26017@work.bitmover.com> <3DB1EAAB.30401@pobox.com> <20021020154609.GD696@phunnypharm.org> <3DB2E661.8070802@pobox.com> <20021020173438.GK696@phunnypharm.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Ben Collins wrote:
>>The whole point of the copyright assignment is that FSF becomes 
>>copyright owner.
>>
>>This is so that Jeff Garzik cannot be strongarmed into changing the 
>>license on his code, or some other anti-software-freedom tactic levied 
>>against me in the future.  In theory, the FSF as an organization will 
>>protect the rights of the software when I might weaken and give in.
>>
>>But in exchange for that protection, you are willingly giving up your 
>>rights as copyright owner...  Less freedom for [hopefully] better 
>>protection.  Just like everything in life, it's a tradeoff... :)
>>
> 
> 
> I disagree. I don't see anything in the copyright assignment (and I have
> signed a few for the FSF) that says I don't retain original copyright
> for my work.


If you keep a copy locally, sure.  But the upstream sources, i.e. what's 
important, you lose rights to even though you may have contributed 
substantial amounts of code.  IOW if binutils goes off in a direction 
you don't like, for example the FSF changes the license from GPL to 
Microsoft EULA, you don't have any say in the matter whatsoever.  You're 
left with a code fork based on the last GPL sources and/or the patches 
you've kept locally.

With Linux, I have a say in what happens to the upstream sources -- the 
thing most people care about :)

	Jeff