[Incubator] RE: OSGeo Holding Copyright

[Rich Steele]

Frank Warmerdam wrote:
> 
> Well, my thinking is that assigning copyright makes it easier for
> the foundation to relicense if needed, and potentially puts the
> foundation in a stronger enforcement position.  I read some of Larry
> Rosen's book, and he also mentions the issue of what would happen to
> the copyright if I died or was incapacitated.  It might become
effectively
> impossible to get relicensing permission from my estate or heirs.

You are correct on all counts, although relicensing isn't an issue if
you grant the foundation a broad enough license (i.e., under the CLA).
 
> That said, it isn't likely I will get all of GDAL assigned so it is
> of limited value.

I wouldn't say it is of limited value.  It certainly secures the portion
of GDAL that you currently hold the copyright to, and that is definitely
worth something.
 
> The other reason I want to do it is that I see it as a sign of
> my personal (and my projects) commitment to the foundation, and
> my personal willingness to give up a degree of control in my project.

I think that is a very strong gesture and commendable.  And although I
know you aren't implying this by your statement, it should be noted that
the disinclination of others to assign copyright does not reduce their
commitment to the foundation or to the open source process.

> > It certainly isn't precluded, and if you want to do so I don't think
> > anyone would object (quite the opposite).  And you can also try to
> > encourage others to do so, but I think many would object to
assigning
> > copyright to the foundation (particularly since the incubation
committee
> > has now voted down even the idea of requiring a contributor license
> > agreement, which is far less onerous than a copyright assignment).
> 
> Well, there is a difference between us voting to not require the CLA,
> and us saying that few would have been willing to sign it.  The
feedback
> I got is that most committers would have been ok with signing the CLA.
> However, we didn't want to lose those that wouldn't, and we didn't
want
> to have to be hassling casual contributors about CLA paperwork all the
> time.

I don't recall that I said few would have been willing to sign the CLA.
I was referring to a copyright assignment being difficult to obtain.  As
an aside, I continue to believe the CLA is a good idea at least for some
projects (i.e., MapGuide Open Source and possibly future projects that
are either corporate code donations or don't have a long history), and
I'll say more about that in a separate posting.

> Larry's book seems to suggest the legal process of assignment is a bit
> involved.  In the past (for my MapServer contributions for instance) I
> just personally went through altering the copyright headers to list
> UMN as the copyright holder instead of me.  But I gather that may not
> be the proper way of doing it.  Is that so?  What sort of paperwork
would
> we use for an assignment?  When creating new files can I just create
> them with OSGeo as the copyright holder without alot of additional
> assignment hassle?

It isn't too involved, but there is one important technical requirement.
Under s.204 of the US Copyright Act, an assignment of copyright must be
in writing and signed by the copyright holder or an authorized agent.
Section 13(4) of Canada's Copyright Act has an identical requirement.
So the act of simply putting a putative transferee's copyright notice on
your work of authorship is not an effective transfer.  If you want to
assign copyright, it need not be cumbersome, but it will need to be in
writing.  I would be happy to help you in creating an assignment
document.