IANAL...
A CLA should specify that the copyright assigned will always be under a license approved by the FSF and OSI.
The "and" is important, as it's probably possible for one of those organizations to go off the rails, but not both.
A CLA should specify that the copyright assigned will always be under a license approved by the FSF and OSI.
The "and" is important, as it's probably possible for one of those organizations to go off the rails, but not both.
At that point, the contributor could take the existing codebase and fork it to keep it open source. Of course, they can only do that under the existing license so they have no power to change the license themselves.
What CLAs do allow (that IMHO is beneficial) is the copyright owner developing other licensing options for specific customers. This can provide a better income source than just “support” for a project.