From: informator@redchan.it
To: antoine.thomas@prestashop.com
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, freebsd-chat@freebsd.org,
misc@openbsd.org, license-discuss-owner@lists.opensource.org,
freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject: [License-discuss] Can a contributor take back open source code ? - Yes, if he has not signed over the copyright.
Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 04:43:15 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b9586de411c283af2f4f2132b174d537@redchan.it> (raw)
> I have a "not easy" question: is it possible for a contributor to
> remove his contributions (code, translations, ...) from an open source
> project?
In short: Yes the copyright holder can do just that in most cases we see
in the wild (where there is no copyright assignment and the licensees
are free-takers).
It seems to the policy of the FSF, SFLC, etc to claim to you that
Illusory Promises are enforceable in the US courts, or to claim that
obeying a preexisting legal duty is valid consideration for a mutually
enforceable agreement (contract). Obviously you have an inkling to the
contrary since you are asking this question. Your suspicion is well
founded, as consideration, contrary to what interested parties may want
you to believe, is still generally a requirement for a promise to be
held enforceable, in the US.
-----
Assuming: Contributor has not signed over his copyrights, and the entity
did not pay consideration to the "contributor":
Yes.
Free Non-exclusive licenses are revocable.
For a promise not to revoke or to revoke only under certain
circumstances to be binding against the grantor he must have received
some bargained-for consideration in exchange.
"Nothing" is not valid consideration.
Offering what you are trying to contract for as "consideration" for that
very contract is not valid consideration.
Obeying a pre-existing legal duty (not violating the copyright holder's
copyright) is not valid consideration.
You can read a lengthy explanation for the lay person here:
lkml.org/lkml/2019/5/3/698
(and it covers the 9th circuit
Artifex case and 9th circuit Artistic License case which some people
will try to make you think invalidates your proprietary rights)
or here:
lkml.org/lkml/2019/5/4/334
Note: If you would like a nice expansive legal paper to read on this
issue, Sapna Kumar's paper is good:
scholarship.law.duke.edu/faculty_scholarship/1857/
www.amazon.com/Open-Source-Licensing-Software-Intellectual/dp/0131487876
papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=243237
> And, if someone do that, is it possible for the project to continue to
> maintain the previous version, thanks to the license? (I mean, before
> the deletion)
No. Once the license is revoked, if the licensee cannot show that it has
an attached interest (ie: a valid contract), by law the licensee
no-longer has permission from the copyright owner to
use/distribute/modify/etc the work of authorship. They may beg the court
under equity for some accommodation, of course.
next reply other threads:[~2019-05-13 4:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-05-13 4:43 informator [this message]
2019-05-13 5:14 [License-discuss] Can a contributor take back open source code ? - Yes, if he has not signed over the copyright informator
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=b9586de411c283af2f4f2132b174d537@redchan.it \
--to=informator@redchan.it \
--cc=antoine.thomas@prestashop.com \
--cc=freebsd-chat@freebsd.org \
--cc=freebsd-current@freebsd.org \
--cc=license-discuss-owner@lists.opensource.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=misc@openbsd.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).