www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org>
Subject Re: [jira] [Commented] (LEGAL-315) Why both Individual CLA and Corporate CLA?
Date Sat, 24 Jun 2017 01:34:44 GMT
On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 5:34 PM, Daniel Shahaf (JIRA) <jira@apache.org> wrote:
>     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-315?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16061690#comment-16061690
> Daniel Shahaf commented on LEGAL-315:
> -------------------------------------
> Ted Dunning (JIRA) wrote on Fri, 23 Jun 2017 22:39 +0000:
>     This is a big deal to Apache and completely unlikely to be flexible.
> Why, really?
> The point of the ICLA is that ASF needs somebody to represent to it that
> they own the rights on the contribution.  Why couldn't the representor
> be a company, rather than an individual?  Yes, "merit" and "karma" are
> keyed to individuals, not to companies, and that is unlikely to change,
> but that's also orthogonal.  It's possible to keep merit and karma keyed
> to individuals while changing the legal framework they contribute under.
> The trade-off would be that we'd have to forbid people contributing under
> such an arrangement from contributing outside of their work hours, until
> and unless they also execute a "standard" ICLA.

Legally speaking (although IANAL) I think you're right -- it could work.

But what the foundation really wants is to promote the "ASF is the place
where individuals collaborate -- check your company affiliation at the door"

There are other foundations that don't care about this (e.g. Linux Foundation)
That's fine -- but I'd rather ASF kept promoting the ideal even at the expense
of slight inconvenience of ICLAs in *addition* to CCLA.

Simply my 2c.


To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org

View raw message