Re: Why not contribute? (to GCC)

[kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu (Richard Kenner)]

> That is not unlimited liability.  That clause says that if you
> contribute code which you do not own to the FSF, and the correct owner
> of the code sues the FSF, and wins the court case, and the FSF is
> forced to pay damages to the true owner, then you are legally
> responsible to cover the FSF's costs, both the costs of damages and
> the cost of litigation.

Yes, but there is no limit to the "costs of damages and the cost
of litigation".  THAT'S the concern being expressed.

> So, if you screw up badly, there is liability, yes.

To me, that's the point.  This clause only operates if the person
doing the assignment did something improper.  HOWEVER, there IS a
legitimate issue: suppose an employee develops a patch and submits it
to the FSF.  Unknown to the company, the employee actually stole the code
from a third party.  But it's the COMPANY that's indemnifying the FSF.
Yes, it can sue its employee and get a judgement in the amount it has to
pay the FSF, but most likely the employee couldn't pay such a judgement.
So you do have a situation here where the company is being forced to
trust its employee.