[wp-docs] More on Copyright

[Ryan Boren]

On Fri, 2005-09-23 at 19:39 -0400, Scott Merrill wrote:
> Advertising links are a no-no for Richard Stallman, and the Free 
> Software Foundation.  The Open Source Initiative is considerably more 
> liberal on these issues.

I thought even OSI's Open Source Definition took a dim view of requiring
visible vanity links.  But, no matter.

> > Enlist the various watchdog groups to your cause. 
> 
> This is taking action after the fact.  Podz has consistently been 
> suggesting that action be taken _before_ any copyright violation occurs, 
> to ensure that the best possible outcome be prepared.

And I think it is an unnecessary and wasteful optimization, but to each
their own.

> Protection measures of all sorts turn people off; but people pursue them 
> because the (perceived) benefit outweighs the (perceived) risk.
> 
> Assigning copyright to the FSF (or hell, even WordPress Inc., if that 
> ever formalizes) allows that single entity to bring more resources to 
> bear against all copyright infringements.   If FSF or WPI owns the 
> copyright, they can bring a (hopefully) more effective suit against an 
> infringer than a rag-tag collection of people from different states with 
> different economy-class attorneys.

Assignment to WP Inc. would raise hell that would dwarf this little
thread.  The conspiracy theories would flourish.

FSF has never brought suit against anyone.

> Another benefit to a single copyright holder is that that entity is then 
> in a position to license the work to other parties under different 
> terms.  If Tim O'Reilly came to WordPress right now and said "I want to 
> publish the Codex, donating half of all proceeds to WordPress; but I 
> don't want to share our source files", Tim would have to get permission 
> from every single contributor.  A single copyright holder would be in a 
> position to definitively say yea or nay.  If WPI owned the copyright, 
> they could tell Tim "Sure thing!".  There would likely not be much 
> uproar from the community were this (admittedly far-fetched) example to 
> occur.

That's a good example of why many people refuse to do copyright
assignment.  Their contributions can be relicensed in ways with which
they might not agree.

Anyway, I'm retiring from this thread.  Ya'll have fun.

Ryan