Contributor License Agreements
|
View:
New views
5 Messages
—
Rating Filter:
Alert me
|
 |
Contributor License Agreements
by Compulinkltd
::
Rate this Message:
My company is considering releasing a software library under an
open-source license. We are contemplating requiring contributors to return a signed Contributor License Agreement similar to the one used by Sun[1], Apache[2], and many others. The advantages we see with CLAs are to preserve the option of re-releasing under a different license, and to strengthen our ability to defend license violations if necessary. The disadvantages we see are the added administrative burden of maintaining them, and reluctance on the part of contributors to sign them. When are CLAs advisable for open source projects? Are there other CLA templates we should consider? Sincerely, Bruce Alspaugh, CTO CompuLink, Ltd. 409 Vandiver Drive #4-200 Columbia, MO 65202-2213 [1] http://www.netbeans.org/about/legal/ca.html [2] http://www.apache.org/licenses/ |
||||||||||
|
|
RE: Contributor License Agreements
by Lawrence Rosen
::
Rate this Message:
The Academic Free License (AFL 3.0) can serve as a contributor agreement,
allowing you to re-release the software under a different license if necessary. /Larry Lawrence Rosen Rosenlaw & Einschlag, a technology law firm (www.rosenlaw.com) 3001 King Ranch Road, Ukiah, CA 95482 707-485-1242 * cell: 707-478-8932 * fax: 707-485-1243 Skype: LawrenceRosen Author of "Open Source Licensing: Software Freedom and Intellectual Property Law" (Prentice Hall 2004) > -----Original Message----- > From: Bruce Alspaugh [mailto:compulinkltd@...] > Sent: Monday, May 14, 2007 7:55 AM > To: License Discuss > Subject: Contributor License Agreements > > My company is considering releasing a software library under an > open-source license. We are contemplating requiring contributors to > return a signed Contributor License Agreement similar to the one used by > Sun[1], Apache[2], and many others. > > The advantages we see with CLAs are to preserve the option of > re-releasing under a different license, and to strengthen our ability to > defend license violations if necessary. The disadvantages we see are > the added administrative burden of maintaining them, and reluctance on > the part of contributors to sign them. > > When are CLAs advisable for open source projects? Are there other CLA > templates we should consider? > > Sincerely, > > Bruce Alspaugh, CTO > CompuLink, Ltd. > 409 Vandiver Drive #4-200 > Columbia, MO 65202-2213 > > [1] http://www.netbeans.org/about/legal/ca.html > [2] http://www.apache.org/licenses/ |
||||||||||
|
|
Re: Contributor License Agreements
by cdcoppola
::
Rate this Message:
Bruce,
I am part of several open source communities where we chose to use CLA's. I can affirm there is an administrative burden associated but I'll also say that we think it's worthwhile. Using CLA's has helped us establish a level of rigor around IP management in our communities that we've found to be very reassuring. Some side benefits we've found is that the process of acquiring CLA's, and the education that goes into it has produced communities that have a keen appreciation for the intellectual property aspects of our efforts. We chose a slight derivative of the Apache CLA. /Chris. On May 14, 2007, at 7:54 AM, Bruce Alspaugh wrote:
|
||||||||||
|
|
Re: Contributor License Agreements
by DShofi
::
Rate this Message:
I could not agree with you more, Chris. I would think that any open source project leader/maintainer would want to seriously consider adopting some sort of CLA or contributor assignment agreement to confirm that the project has the copyright rights necessary to distribute the open source/free software. The moderate level of administration does seem to be worth the time and effort. David
Bruce, I am part of several open source communities where we chose to use CLA's. I can affirm there is an administrative burden associated but I'll also say that we think it's worthwhile. Using CLA's has helped us establish a level of rigor around IP management in our communities that we've found to be very reassuring. Some side benefits we've found is that the process of acquiring CLA's, and the education that goes into it has produced communities that have a keen appreciation for the intellectual property aspects of our efforts. We chose a slight derivative of the Apache CLA. /Chris. On May 14, 2007, at 7:54 AM, Bruce Alspaugh wrote: My company is considering releasing a software library
under an
|
||||||||||
|
|
Re: Contributor License Agreements
by Roberta Cairney
::
Rate this Message:
As a lawyer with a fair amount of open source
experience, I certainly agree. Also, my clients have found that the Apache CLA is a good place to start. An effective CLA is one of the strongest safeguards for protecting the integrity of OS projects, over the long run. --- DShofi@... wrote: > I could not agree with you more, Chris. I would > think that any open > source project leader/maintainer would want to > seriously consider adopting > some sort of CLA or contributor assignment agreement > to confirm that the > project has the copyright rights necessary to > distribute the open > source/free software. The moderate level of > administration does seem to > be worth the time and effort. > > David > > > > > > "Christopher D. Coppola" <chris.coppola@...> > 05/14/2007 02:24 PM > > To > Bruce Alspaugh <compulinkltd@...> > cc > License Discuss <license-discuss@...> > Subject > Re: Contributor License Agreements > > > > > > > Bruce, > > I am part of several open source communities where > we chose to use CLA's. > I can affirm there is an administrative burden > associated but I'll also > say that we think it's worthwhile. Using CLA's has > helped us establish a > level of rigor around IP management in our > communities that we've found to > be very reassuring. Some side benefits we've found > is that the > process of acquiring CLA's, and the education that > goes into it has > produced communities that have a keen appreciation > for the intellectual > property aspects of our efforts. > > We chose a slight derivative of the Apache CLA. > > /Chris. > > > > On May 14, 2007, at 7:54 AM, Bruce Alspaugh wrote: > > My company is considering releasing a software > library under an > open-source license. We are contemplating requiring > contributors to > return a signed Contributor License Agreement > similar to the one used by > Sun[1], Apache[2], and many others. > > The advantages we see with CLAs are to preserve the > option of > re-releasing under a different license, and to > strengthen our ability to > defend license violations if necessary. The > disadvantages we see are > the added administrative burden of maintaining them, > and reluctance on > the part of contributors to sign them. > > When are CLAs advisable for open source projects? > Are there other CLA > templates we should consider? > > Sincerely, > > Bruce Alspaugh, CTO > CompuLink, Ltd. > 409 Vandiver Drive #4-200 > Columbia, MO 65202-2213 > > [1] http://www.netbeans.org/about/legal/ca.html > [2] http://www.apache.org/licenses/ > > > > ************************************************* > > This email message may contain information that is > confidential and/or > privileged and is intended only for use of the > individual or entity named > above. If the reader of this message is not the > intended recipient, or > the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to > the intended recipient, > you are hereby notified that any dissemination, > distribution, or copying > of this communication is strictly prohibited. If > you have received this > communication in error, please notify sender > immediately and destroy the > original message. Thank you. |
| Free embeddable forum powered by Nabble | Forum Help |
