[dmd-internals] DMD copyright assignment

[Andrei Alexandrescu via dmd-internals]

On 6/24/14, 4:15 PM, Leandro Lucarella wrote:
> Andrei Alexandrescu, el 24 de June a las 15:55 me escribiste:
>> On 6/24/14, 3:32 PM, Leandro Lucarella via dmd-internals wrote:
>>> If the copyright assignment requirement were well grounded, then maybe
>>> it would be justified, but to require it just based on a potential
>>> unknown and extremely unlikely fear seems pointless.
>>
>> What seems pointless to me is this long and protracted discussion
>> around... around what? What or whom are we talking about protecting
>> here? It's not a practical matter, and it's not a matter of
>> principles. If protecting the copyright of one's work is high on
>> one's list of priorities, OSS is not the best place to be.
>
> But your position is contradictory.

No. And this kind of sophism is the very kind of thing I'm hoping to not 
exchange forever, yet look at us.

> If you want to protect the software
> to keep being free, then you need a proper organization, not a private
> company, because as I said, same as people can disappear or change their
> mind (yeah, even after 14 years), then companies or Gods like Walter
> could too. If you are offering false protection at the price of
> bureaucracy for contributors (is not about not wanting to cede the
> rights ONLY), it doesn't sound very appealing.

It's not bureaucracy, and any "we should do X" without you putting skin 
in the game I just tune out. I don't want to trust 100 people about the 
future of D.

> This is why any large groups organize themselves in institutions that
> doesn't rely on individuals and have well defined constitutions or
> missions.

If you think that's the right path, then go ahead and define an 
organization. Again, if you say "we" should do so there's zero value in it.

>> Crap has happened before, among reasonable people, and in ways that
>> had not been predicted.
>
> Exactly, so why crap couldn't happen with Walter or Digital Mars?

Again, I'd rather trust Walter to act in the interest of D than an 
ill-defined collection of persons.

>> We don't have money. We don't have lawyers.
>> We don't want to spend time analyzing, projecting, estimating, or
>> speculating. We want to keep things simple and save everybody
>> involved complications while keeping everything as open as possible.
>
> Then forget about copyright assignment, is an unneeded and expensive
> hassle :)

The unneeded and expensive hassle is this.

>> This very discussion is a huge waste of time wanking over nothing.
>> What the heck are we even _talking_ about, folks?
>
> Apparently requiring copyright assignment for any contribution.
> Honestly, I think I will have a hard time convincing my bosses to cede
> their  right over the code they are paying me to produce. VERY hard to
> sell.

Sociomantic-copyrighted code in the D compiler in addition to 
DigitalMars-copyrighted code doesn't seem like the more the merrier to me.


Andrei