Yes. It may be ignorant, naïve and overly convenient on both parts, but we are suggesting that the practice of mutual trust satisfies our current needs. As stated, we are actually trying to make it easy to contribute to Pike, not doing everything in our power to take every last precaution against being maneuvered into a position where we would have to withdraw a Pike release with code someone suddenly claims not to have signed away.
I honestly don't think we would end up in a situation like that, with as clearly stated rules as we have. If someone really wants to bother us and slow things down for us, they will most likely succeed whether we try to protect ourselves legally from them or not. I don't see why we should pester contributors with cumbersome procedures unless we have reason to. And, as stated by Nilsson, Swedish law is a long shot from American law when it comes to applying sane reasoning. :)
/ Johan Sundström, Lysator
Previous text:
2003-09-11 22:03: Subject: Re: IDA's policy on Pike contributions
On Thu, Sep 11, 2003 at 03:25:01PM -0400, Johan Sundström, Lysator @ Pike developers forum wrote:
To date we have not asked anyone to sign any papers, nor suggested any change, that I know of. Or, put more directly: what are you talking about?
you are saying that you assume the terms to be agreed upon without actually putting it into writing?
i am suggesting that puts you onto very weak ground. you will actually have to proove that the contributor knew and agreed to the conditions. thats a lot easier to do if it is in writing.
i am quite sure something as drastic as sighning over copyright would not have any stand in court otherwise.
the FSF does require the signover in writing and signed. and i assumed you would make it no different.
greetings, martin.
/ Brevbäraren