Re: Was that the (a?) "standard" copyright assignment

[Mike Stump <mrs at windriver dot com>]

> From: David Young <dyoung@vviuh221.vvi.com>
> Date: Mon,  1 May 2000 20:47:33 -0400
> To: shebs@apple.com

> Minor? tweaked? ... I think? ... you say.

> Really now ... what does that mean? I'll have to see the exact contract.

I think Stan is way to polite to call you on this, but someone should;
I will.  Please explain what right you think you have to see the exact
contract?  Answer, none.

I think your posting is rude.

Apple can choose to donate what work they might under any terms they
feel like, if they feel like it.  If anything, Apple is to be
applauded for doing this.

As to what the contract says or not, that is ultimately between the
FSF and Apple, and their representatives.  If you're neither, then you
aren't a party to it.

If there is some work that you as a user are interested in that Apple
has done, send the work off to someone that can represent Apple, and
ask them if they can submit it, or ask if you can submit it for them
under their assignment.  You don't need to know what the assignment
says, in general, only the FSF need know that it lives up to certain
minimum standards and Apple need to know.


Now, there is no reason to read so much ill into the contract as
you've done.  I'll give you an example of the types of modifications
corporations might make.  The WRS assignment, is for all work that WRS
owns, for all employees, contractors and so on, for all time, both
past an present, for a certain set of packages (tool chains, gdb, that
type), that is submitted to the FSF by WRS representatives.  This
differs a bit from the standard assignment, but in ways that we wanted
it to differ.  It gives me some extra latitude in submitting work that
I didn't write, and for work that may happen in the future or in the
past.  Also, it gives me a way of not assigning, if we choose to not
assign for any reason.  This last actually strengths the contract, as
it give us some recourse to not submit work, this is necessary as
otherwise the contract would be very broad indeed.  Now, you could
read tons of negative stuff into this, but that would be unfair to us,
as in reality the types of such I would not submit, are those things
that would not be accepted anyway.  The canonical example is an
environment variable that is set in our environment that allows one to
move the entire environment (includes more than just compilers) around
in the file-system.  I send out from time to time snapshots of our work
to interested parties that want it, I'm happy to give my blessing on
most of it, the stuff I would not, is so unclean as to break every
other target beside ours.  After cleaning it up, I would be happy to
donate the rest of it.


By asking about specific work your interested in, you can find out if
it is covered, or not.  If it is not covered, you can request they
file an assignment for it.  What would be rude, is to demand they file
an assignment for it.  That isn't the way volunteerism works.  They
are gifts by people that feel like giving.  You have no right to
demand they give.  If you want that right, they will gladly sell it to
you, just pull out your checkbook and start writing.