Loomio
Mon 10 Sep 2012 1:42PM

The CLA, did everybody sign it and is it still appropriate

JH Jonne Haß Public Seen by 69
JH

Jonne Haß Mon 10 Sep 2012 1:42PM

So what does community governance mean?

The founders seem not to be willing to do any large contributions to Diaspora anymore, so the community shall decide, the community shall do, the founders will own. That isn't exactly my definition of fair.

I've no problem with a BSD style license, but donating my work to others without them doing anything for it, is… hardly acceptable.

So we rule this project now, shouldn't all new contributions be still owned by us, or some sort of non-profit foundation/organization/whatever applies best at least?

G

groovehunter Mon 10 Sep 2012 2:25PM

Could you provide a link, where's that stated pls?

G

groovehunter Mon 10 Sep 2012 4:53PM

Let's rewrite - !

JH

Jeremy Huffman Mon 10 Sep 2012 4:54PM

If you read this you should see it is not an assignment of copyright, but a grant of an AGPL/MIT license to contributed code. D Inc doesn't "own" the contribution.

JH

Jonne Haß Mon 10 Sep 2012 5:22PM

While they contract them self to publish your contribution under AGPL/MIT/CC they still own the copyright (well, here in Germany you can't get rid of your own copyright but that's another story). Quote "Diaspora is copyright Diaspora Inc., 2010, and files herein are licensed
under the Affero General Public License version 3" https://github.com/diaspora/diaspora/blob/master/COPYRIGHT and "# Copyright (c) 2010-2012, Diaspora Inc. " as the first bytes in almost every file.

G

groovehunter Mon 10 Sep 2012 5:43PM

Change in license (nondual?) might be voted lateron, but what about a substitution of Diaspora Inc with diaspora foundation?

FS

Florian Staudacher Mon 10 Sep 2012 6:25PM

I think these are some of the basic ideas (in general, not necessarily from the CLA):

"all code released in context of the Diaspora project is published under the AGLP license"
"parts of the code may be re-published under the MIT license if deemed necessary or useful"
"copyright remains with the respective authors" (more or less EU copyright law*)
"by submitting code the author grants an unrestricted right of usage to the Diaspora project"

?

  • in the EU I may agree to a contract signing away my copyright, but that still doesn't make it so. I simply cannot hand over the authorship of something and with that I retain all associated rights. I may only grant an unrestricted usage right to some other entity. (at least that's what I remember from my "Daten-&Informatikrecht" course at university)
JH

Jeremy Huffman Mon 10 Sep 2012 6:59PM

There is no language in the CLA that attempts or implies reassignment of copyright. Copyright notice doesn't change it.

AX

adri xador Mon 10 Sep 2012 7:19PM

I don't undertand much about licences but from what i am reading here i understand this: Hy world i have this car, Pegeot 206 i give you the right to tune it so call me when it's done, i am going on vacacions un Europe, when i get back i what may car to be a ferrari. If it's like this please people, you learned allot this 2 years about how a social red shoul work so make a realy open source social red. This guys don't give a damn about Diaspora they made the other project (who was donating for Makro.io? is there posible that they did that whit money from Diaspora? )
So let's say that in 2 month there will be 200 or 500 coders working on Diaspora and in 6 months Diaspora has the best fedration protocol or what ever but when you start to work on apps so users can realy use diaspora like a social red Google or .......... calls the founders , then the founder decide that you guys did enough and they will do the rest now, and wee have to whait 2 more year for the chat code then 2 more for calendar and 2 more.....
Wee need Diaspora to be freeeeeeeeeeeeeee.

Load More