Re: [png-mng-misc] CFD: Should we sign up with the new softwarefreedom conservancy?

[Bob F. <bfr...@si...>]

On Tue, 4 Apr 2006, Glenn Randers-Pehrson wrote:

> At 04:33 PM 4/4/2006 -0500, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
>
>
>> These schemes where existing open source projects assign their
>> copyrights to an umbrella corporation don't make much sense to me.
>> It makes much more sense to create a "superfund" and pool of lawyers
>> available to defend eligible open source projects without requiring
>> alterations to the project.  By "eligible" I mean that the project has
>> not knowingly violated any copyrights or patents, and has no
>> intentions to do so in the future.
>
> It seems to me that that is what the software conservancy is offering.
> Isn't it optional whether the project transfers either money or IP to
> them?

The problem is that in order to avoid just being a "friend of the 
court" (i.e. "nuisance") the protective organization needs to be 
legally accountable/liable for your actions.  Otherwise, the judge can 
ban them from the courtroom other than via lawyers they provide to 
you.  Typically the protective organization signs a contract saying 
that they agree to pay the developer $1 for their work.  I signed a 
contract like that with the FSF and they have not paid me the $1 but I 
am sure that they would as soon as there was reason to.

If the organization is not positioned to take legal responsibility for 
your actions, then if they lose the case, you are still liable for any 
penalties.

Bob
======================================
Bob Friesenhahn
bfr...@si..., http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/
GraphicsMagick Maintainer,    http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/