On Wed, 2014-02-19 at 11:03 +0100, Fabian Keil wrote:
Hugo Roy hugo@fsfe.org wrote:
Second, this is not about whether people prefer BSD/MIT-style licenses or (A/L)GPL-style. This is about assigning your copyright to an entity in a way that makes it possible for that entity to decide on their own if they want to release as proprietary software or not something that include your contribution.
This doesn't require copyright assignment, though. The same can and does happen with what you refer to as liberal licenses.
Yes, and so? I don't understand your point. What we are talking about here is *copyright assignment*, nothing else.
It may
very well be possible that the whole is never released as Free Software at all, whether under a liberal license or under a protective license.
Again, this doesn't require copyright assignment.
And so, what's your point?
My point is that in case of permissive licenses the licensee is already free to reuse the software as part of a proprietary product and thus doesn't need copyright assignment.
It does if you want to re-license the whole product (without asking the contributors) or even worse turn it to proprietary.
~nikos