Re: Basic legal question: Publication of a fix to psgml

["Andreas Röhler" <andreas.roehler@easy-emacs.de>]

Am 02.04.2013 10:54, schrieb Nicolas Neuss:
> Bastien <bzg@altern.org> writes:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Andreas Röhler <andreas.roehler@easy-emacs.de> writes:
>>
>>> When using GPLed code, you may simply publish your changed code
>>> GPLed again.
>>
>> More precisely, GPLed code gives you the right to reuse and publish
>> the code in your code if it's published under the same license.
>>
>> So yes, you can publish your changes to this code.
>>
>>> Thanks giving another example wrt to the noxious results of
>>> copyright assigment policy, which undermines goals of GPL.
>>
>> Why pushing your agenda against copyright assignment into this thread?
>>
>> I don't think it is irrevelant.
>>
>> The question is "Can I publish the changes?" and the answer is "Yes".
>>
>> As for including psgml into GNU ELPA, the answer is "Not until all
>> authors have sign the FSF copyright assignment".
>>
>> This is a policy that is particular to GNU Emacs and some other GNU
>> projects.  It shows respect for potential authors (by not including
>> their code without their permission) and protects actual authors (by
>> allowing them to rely on the fact that changes against Emacs code by
>> signed contributors can be part of Emacs.)
>
> I think there is a more important reason for those copyright
> assignments: The FSF considers its projects as so central for free
> software that their copyright status has to be beyond any doubt.
>
> For example, there could arise severe damage if some malicious company
> (you name it) suddenly claimed that central pieces of GNU software were
> contributed (maybe years ago) by some of their employees without
> employer's permission.
>

In which way a CA-paper could avoid that?
What about the opposite danger: a company signs, provides crucial parts and withdraws CA?
See current discussions at emacs-devel on a lower scale.

Emacs got a lot of re-write already for pur CA-reasons.
Isn't that spoiled human labor in the light of GPL?

Andreas

> Nicolas
>
> [I will read answers to this, but (probably) not respond, because I also
> think that this is the wrong newsgroup for this discussion.]
>
>
>