But seriously folks: anyone who says "you probably don't need CLAs (or other reasonable governance structures) for open source" in 2018 does not have your best interests at heart.https://twitter.com/slightlylate/status/954769884818239488 …
2 important points: - Nobody (TM) is dumb enough to go after Mozilla first. Just the look of that makes any credible lawyer go "uhhhh...." - Ownership has still been an issue for Mozilla in that timeframe: https://www-archive.mozilla.org/MPL/relicensing-faq.html …
-
-
It's good that relicensing to MPL was difficult for Mozilla. It *should* be difficult to retroactively change the agreement under which contributions were made. CLAs are emblematic of a misunderstanding by most companies wrt community projects -- they think they "own" them.
-
The only style of CLA that is really "good" for a community is the FSF style (which restricts what it can be relicensed to and doesn't rob you of your own rights). But the whole "rubber-stamp" Apache CLA thing is quite toxic to the free software community IMHO.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
& Web Standards TL; Blink API OWNER
Named PWAs w/
DMs open. Tweets my own; press@google.com for official comms.