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

[Mike Stump <mrs at windriver dot com>]

> From: David Young <dyoung@vviuh221.vvi.com>
> Date: Tue,  2 May 2000 08:59:47 -0400
> To: Mike Stump <mrs@windriver.com>

> Idealistically I agree, but I need to see the contract before
> contributing my time for free. You see, I'm not asking for anything
> for free (but Stan did); I'm asking to be able to prudently read a
> contract that will determine how what I send to Apple will be used.

The contract will not answer this question.  Experience or asking
them, or other things may.

Also, the FSF prefers that you as the author of work, send it to the
FSF (that's us), not Apple.  We will decide to include it, or not. The
only assignment that is relevant, is the one _you_ file with the FSF.

I'd expect that in time, someone from Apple would in fact _be_ the FSF
maintainer for the Apple bits, and further, I'd expect you to work
_with_ others that work on the Apple bits, but this happens regardless
of the Apple assignment.

> Excuse me? We pay Apple good money to get software. You have it backwards.

Ah, you pay them money, but not for this right. If you do, please
quote your contract with them that gives you this right.

> OK, I send ideas and code to, say for instance, Apple and they
> choose not to assign... is that the way it works?

Actually, the FSF would not accept such code from Apple I don't
believe.  You must have an assignment with the FSF.  Apple can only
donate code _they_ own.  They don't own code you write.  You could
have an assignment with Apple, but the FSF I think would prefer that
the more direct route be used.