Copyright protection (was Re: [TriLUG] SCO Conference Call)

[Gnu Man]

It seems that people are focusing more on SCO's business model of "Scare
and Sue" than the issue of copyright protection.

Let's leave SCO out of the equation.

Let's pretend that I started an Open Source project.

I copyright or copyleft, under the GPL.

In the beginning I write most of the code myself, and it gains some
users and another developer or two.

A developer on the project contributes code that is somebody else's and
not under an Open Source License.

What protection do I have for my users, my other developers, and for
myself?

ps- I've googled, and scoured gnu's and fsf's websites to no avail.
     I'm not proposing anything, just asking a question ;)
     If you really want to see my driver's license it will
     cost you $699 ($1399 after OCT 15) ;P   		

On Tue, 2003-08-05 at 22:25, Ed Hill wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-08-05 at 18:59, Gnu Man wrote:
> > What safeguards are put into place?  I'm not attacking you, but merely
> > asking.  I'm also not trying to start a flame war (although I never
> > remove my asbestos underwear).
> > 
> > If the safeguards are there, and how can we defend ourselves against
> > someone who claims that their code has entered our source tree, but
> > won't show the offending code.  A quote from SCO, "because we require
> > all of our Unix licensees to keep this code in confidence for their own
> > business purposes" .
> > 
> > There is a legitimate issue here.  Whether SCO has any legitimate claims
> > remains to be seen.  Ignoring the problem, calling it FUD or whatever,
> > will not solve the problem.
> > 
> > We all may soon be forced to go underground (or face legal liability)
> > with our love for our favorite penguin powered machines, if corrective
> > measures are not put into place.
> > 
> > I am only trying to help, if I am not welcomed here, then so be it.
> > 
> > I hate to see such a great idea as open source go down the drain because
> > we didn't act and put proper protections in place.
> 
> 
> Oh, thats baloney.
> 
> Exactly what "safeguards" do you propose?
> 
> The FSF already has extensive documentation
> 
>   http://www.fsf.org/
>   http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/philosophy.html
>   http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/why-assign.html
> 
> and has taken great pains to explain the proper means for code
> development and copyright assignment.  And to date, they have an
> excellent track record with regard to GPL enforcement.  Honestly, try
> googling for "GPL license enforcement" and see what you find.
> 
> So yes, there is "an issue" here.  The issue is SCOX -- a company thats
> desperately trying to drag who- and what-ever they can along with them
> as they hurl towards financial oblivion.
> 
> Ed
> 
> ps - And Tanner has an excellent point.  Isn't it curious that 
>      you who are trying to make some (ill-defined?) point about 
>      code ownership and copyright attribution fail to provide 
>      an identity?
> 
> 
> > On Tue, 2003-08-05 at 17:33, Tanner Lovelace wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2003-08-05 at 17:28, Gnu Man wrote:
> > > > That would be like cutting off the head to cure the headache.
> > > > 
> > > > The root of the problem is IP (intellectual property).  Open source
> > > > needs a system to protect everyone that copyrighted code is not entered
> > > > into their source trees.
> > > > 
> > > > I'm afraid if this problem is not fixed, Open Source Software's future
> > > > does not look very good.
> > > 
> > > Ok, I'm calling you on this right now!  This is nothing but FUD.
> > > Open Source Software's future is perfectly fine.  There are plenty
> > > of safeguards for this, and if somehow something slips through
> > > it gets removed as fast as it can get identified.
> > > 
> > > I begin to wonder why you are hiding behind the facade of a name
> > > like Gnu Man.  Who are you really?  With statements like that, you're
> > > no Gnu Man.  Do you work at SCO?   Go spread your FUD elsewhere.
> > > 
> > > Tanner