microcline + licensing   16

3 Points to Consider before Migrating Away from React Because of Facebook’s ‘BSD+ Patent’ License
1. Alternatives to React may still be vulnerable to Facebook’s React patents
2. Using React doesn’t give Facebook more patents to use against you.
3. If Facebook uses their patents ‘offensively,’ using React may shield you from Facebook also using necessary-for-React patents offensively
facebook-PATENTS-license  licensing  patent-licensing 
august 2017 by microcline
Apache: ICLA is required for commit access.
"For the ASF, an iCLA is required once one gets commit access.

Regarding the CCLA, that must be determined my the individual themselves.
There is no one, complete, all-inclusive answer other than "it depends" :)"

Jim Jagielski (recently former Apache VP Legal Affairs), org.apache.legal-discuss 2017-03-23
contributor_license_agreement  apache  licensing 
april 2017 by microcline
Copyright notices for open source projects
"Copyright [year project started] - [current year], [project founder] and the [project name] contributors."
copyright  open_source  licensing 
october 2016 by microcline
Developer Certificate of Origin
Think of it as a minimal Contributor License Agreement, leveraging inbound == outbound.
contributor_license_agreement  licensing  open_source 
june 2016 by microcline
Should open source communities avoid contributor agreements
It may well be advisable to have a participant agreement

Contributor agreements **that aggregate the copyrights** of open source code in favour of a single corporate sponsor are a sure sign of a community where one member has more rights than the rest.
contributor_license_agreement  licensing 
june 2016 by microcline
Why Your Project Doesn't Need a Contributor Licensing Agreement
In practice, most CLAs in use today are deleterious overkill ...

CLAs simply shift legal blame for any patent infringement, copyright infringement, or other bad acts from the project (or its legal entity) back onto its contributors.

disastrously, CLAs require the first interaction between a FLOSS project and a new contributor to involve a complex legal negotiation and a formal legal agreement. CLAs twist the empowering, community-oriented, enjoyable experience of FLOSS contribution into an annoying exercise in pointless bureaucracy, which (if handled properly) requires a business-like, grating haggle between necessarily adverse parties.

The most ardent supporters of CLAs have yet to experience first-hand the arduous daily work required to manage a queue of incoming FLOSS contributions. Those of us who have done the latter easily see that avoiding additional barriers to entry is paramount. While a beautifully crafted CLA — jam-packed with legalese that artfully shifts all the blame off to the contributors — may make some corporate attorneys smile, but I've never seen such bring anything but a frown and a sigh from FLOSS developers.
contributor_license_agreement  licensing  open_source 
june 2016 by microcline
Can You Contribute Code To An Open Source Project?
Most employees are not in fact the copyright holders for copyright material that is generated as part of their work. This will vary from organisation to organisation, and possibly between job roles within an organisation. Please note: having written this code at home will not, by itself, indicate that you hold the copyright on it

How do you get the consent of your employer or institution to contribute their copyright material to an open source project?

Regrettably the steps involved may be numerous, and are almost inevitably peculiar to your organisation. Nor do they guarantee that consent will be forthcoming.
contributor_license_agreement  licensing  open_source 
june 2016 by microcline

Copy this bookmark: