Hacker News Reader

> It is not ethical to demand copyright assignment in addition to the free labor of the open source community.

Unless you're a GNU project under the FSF?

I don't think Drew would disagree with your point, given he has been vocally critical of the GNU project due to the continued involvement of Stallman and those who support Stallman.

However, it's important to note that practically it's not clear that GNU actually need a CLA if they wanted to pull such a movie. Contributions to GNU projects are GPL-x-or-later licensed, and GNU are the authority to declare something as GPL 4, even if it contained language that allowed the project owner to close the project.

You are wrong on many details here. First of all, GNU isn't even a legal entity. The only legal entity is the FSF. Second, only some GNU packages have a copyright assignment to the FSF, not all. Some packages use a DCO, and some have way more creative solutions (see https://www.gnunet.org/static/pdf/copyright.pdf for example). Finally, not all GNU packages are necessarily GPL-x-or-later. Yes, that's generally a good default (and sometimes AGPL-or-later or LGPL-or-later are good, too), but not a strict rule.

Many people oppose the FSF's policy of copyright/IP/ownership theft.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com