On 01/11/16 19:37, Michael Stahl wrote:
may i suggest you actually *read* the clauses of the MPLv2 that Michael
has pointed out as being particularly helpful, and then think about what
risks accepting code contributions under other licenses lacking such
clauses would expose TDF and downstream distributors to.
Hmmm... Basically that the contributor explicitly warrants that he has
the authority to grant those rights ...
(Incidentally, if I understand my UK law correctly, clause 8 could be
problematic although that's extremely unlikely in practice. Under
certain - in this case improbable - circumstances, the smaller party has
choice of venue, contract clauses notwithstanding :-)
Anyways, even if I'm not happy with this, sounds like I ought to bow out
of it.
(And the good news is, hopefully 11.1 will soon be irrelevant - it looks
like software patents - as in "software on a general purpose computer" -
will soon be dead in the water :-)
Cheers,
Wol
Context
Privacy Policy |
Impressum (Legal Info) |
Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (
MPLv2).
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our
trademark policy.