[Commotion-dev] license and copyright assignment?

[Josh King]

The CommotionWRT code I've written is under the GPLv3, and I have a 
strong preference for GPL licenses. We haven't been asking projects to 
assign copyright to us (OTI) for code we've funded to have added to 
existing projects, but standalone original applications like MeshTether 
may be a different matter that we've just picked up discussions here at 
OTI about what that would look like. I'm going to find out from people 
here what the view is on best practice under the grant, and bring that 
to the list as a discussion point.

On Fri 08 Jun 2012 05:06:18 PM EDT, Ben West wrote:
> The underlying OpenWRT codebase uses GPL, would that be the suggested
> choice for commotion-openwrt?
> http://wiki.openwrt.org/about/license
>
> On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 4:00 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner
> <hans at guardianproject.info> wrote:
>>
>> Which license should I be using for the Commotion code?  I'm fine with
>> GPL, LGPL, Apache, and BSD.  When a piece of code I've worked on is
>> based on another package I generally find it makes the most sense to
>> keep the license the same as the original.
>>
>> Also, who should the copyright be assigned to?  OTI? New America? FSF? me?
>>
>> .hc
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Commotion-dev mailing list
>> Commotion-dev at lists.chambana.net
>> http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/commotion-dev
>>
>
>
>

--
Josh King

"I am an Anarchist not because I believe Anarchism is the final goal,
but because there is no such thing as a final goal." -Rudolf Rocker

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 900 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/commotion-dev/attachments/20120608/2d19fc68/attachment.sig>