This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Copyright assignments and the MAINTAINERS file
neroden@twcny.rr.com (Nathanael Nerode) wrote on 19.02.04 in <4034432C.2040300@twcny.rr.com>:
> Richard Kenner wrote:
> > I believe, if I'm not very much mistaken, that secret contracts are
> > generally "against public policy" and there's no way to keep them
> > secret if it matters.
> >
> > A sale is a contract.
> Yes, and generally can't be kept secret if it matters.
>
> > Do you believe you have a right to go to IBM
> > or Microsoft and ask for a list of their customers?
>
> No, *I* don't, because I have no *interest* in the matter. But IBM and
> Microsoft have the right to give out their customer lists, and the
> customers have the right to explain that they personally are Microsoft
> or IBM customers -- neither party can prevent the other from making the
> contract public. That may not be great, but it seems to be the state of
> the current law, generally. :-/
Well, maybe it is where you sit. OTOH, I am pretty certain that IBM and
Microsoft do not have that right here; it pretty clearly breaks the Data
Protection Act, and that might even mean jailtime for someone.
However, it is very much not clear to me that this has any applicability
to FSF copyright assignments. At least not to such assignments that have
been acted on, that is, code has actually been contributed; this certainly
makes the existence of *some* such assignment public, and after it is
public, I don't see where any privacy rights would come from. Nor do I see
how such rights could apply to corporate assignments.
Of course, this is all rather academic, as it seems hard to believe that
the individuals and corporations in question would have any serious wish
to keep this private in the first place.
Hmm ... this suggests one way around this: GCC could ask people if they
were willing to publish their assignment status, and put those into, say,
MAINTAINERS; and think about workarounds if it turns out someone actually
does not want that. (Keeping in mind that non-personal assignments might
entail talking to some company lawyer.)
MfG Kai