Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

GNU C Library Looking To Drop FSF Copyright Assignment Policy

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #51
    Originally posted by coder View Post
    It's not needy to expect ...
    Yes, it is. The need to match your expectations is you being needy.

    Comment


    • #52
      Originally posted by sdack View Post
      Yes, it is. The need to match your expectations is you being needy.
      No, it's called a social norm. They're basic expectations we have of each other, in order to have productive discussions.

      Violation of these norms is often characterized as being rude. The fact that you didn't take issue with that part shows some acknowledgement that you were out of line.

      Comment


      • #53
        Originally posted by coder View Post
        No, it's called a social norm.
        No, it is not. You are still only being needy and are now also ranting.
        Last edited by sdack; 20 June 2021, 08:14 AM.

        Comment


        • #54
          Originally posted by sdack View Post
          No, it is not.
          What tells me you're wrong is that I've been taken to task for doing the same thing. The main difference is that I acknowledged the offense and apologized for it.

          Originally posted by sdack View Post
          You are still only being needy and are now also ranting.
          I don't honestly expect you to even acknowledge the point, as that would be tantamount to an apology, which are about as scarce on the Internet as oxygen on the moon.

          I've said what I had to say and I'm prepared to leave at that. Let's see if you're big enough to do the same.

          Comment


          • #55
            Originally posted by coder View Post
            ...
            Shut up or get back on topic.

            Comment


            • #56
              Originally posted by sdack View Post
              ...
              Enough nonsense. Post flagged.

              Comment


              • #57
                Originally posted by sdack View Post
                Shut up or get back on topic.
                Pretty ironic considering how this conversation started.

                Comment


                • #58
                  Well, here it goes. Apple and the likes finally got what they want.
                  https://lwn.net/Articles/405417/

                  We not only have to deal with anti-user practices like Android phones without keys for locked bootloaders in newer architectures which came after GPLv2 was released, but also with steering committees from Glibc and GCC agreeing to give more power to corporations because reasons.

                  Individuals are being given the option to not assign Copyright. And Corporations are getting the benefit of this change. And it seems there won't be any clause to give permission to reassign Copyright after a period of time in order to not lose work nor losing control of the project.

                  This is like signing a contract with a record company. Too much rights lost for so little benefit.

                  Good luck and have a nice day.

                  Comment


                  • #59
                    Originally posted by Filiprino View Post
                    Well, here it goes. Apple and the likes finally got what they want.
                    https://lwn.net/Articles/405417/

                    We not only have to deal with anti-user practices like Android phones without keys for locked bootloaders in newer architectures which came after GPLv2 was released, but also with steering committees from Glibc and GCC agreeing to give more power to corporations because reasons.

                    Individuals are being given the option to not assign Copyright. And Corporations are getting the benefit of this change. And it seems there won't be any clause to give permission to reassign Copyright after a period of time in order to not lose work nor losing control of the project.

                    This is like signing a contract with a record company. Too much rights lost for so little benefit.

                    Good luck and have a nice day.
                    I don’t get what you said.

                    The gcc and glibc are released under GPL anyway, so what’s the difference with contributers retaining their copy right?

                    After it is released under GPL with their code signed and contributers agreed, it is effectively not their code.

                    Even if they didn’t PR back to upstream, they ought to release the code for GPL itself demands it.

                    I didn’t see any loss of rights here.

                    Comment


                    • #60
                      Originally posted by NobodyXu View Post
                      After it is released under GPL with their code signed and contributers agreed, it is effectively not their code.
                      That's false.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X