--- Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 2/5/07, Niclas Hedhman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Sunday 04 February 2007 22:42, robert burrell donkin wrote: > > > * donations (whether covered by a CLA, JIRA opt in or a software > grant) > > > > Shouldn't we avoid the word "donation"?? Code is not donated to > ASF, it is > > licensed. "Time" is perhaps donated to ASF, but not IP... > > I believe people are donating a copyright to the code. A license > doesn't transfer copyright or make another party the copyright > holder. > In the case of these commits, the ASF is becoming a joint copyright > holder to the work. Since we are a non-profit organization that > solicits monetary donations, I don't see why we would shy away from > the word "donate" when we are talking about IP. > > In the case of our own commits, as copyright holders, we are donating > (or contributing) to the ASF a non-exclusive copyright, and then we > are committing the donation/contribution as an authorized > representative of the ASF. It's a "two hat" process :) > > -Ted.
First off let me say, I'm greatly enjoying this discussion. My understanding is the piece of work that is being discussed is the patch/diff/zip/tar file that is being distributed to the ASF through CLA, JIRA, Bugzilla and software grant contributions. Generally, no one is assigning their copyright of the patch/diff/zip/tar file to the ASF, they are only granting them license to modify it and include it in a larger work (amongst other things). The ASF owns the copyright of the larger work. -Chris --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
