...

...

...

...

"MZ" == Moshe Zadka writes:

MZ> Who's in charge of the PSA? Or should we form *another* MZ> non-profit, and sign it over to it? (Personally, I couldn't MZ> care less who I transfer copyright over my Python MZ> contributions to -- I'd put it in the public domain if that's MZ> what it took) Please remember that the copyright holder can release the code under whatever license they want, even multiple different licenses. Copyright != license. I'm not sure what the right thing to do here is. On the one hand, Bob Kahn always said nobody would use Python if its heritage (i.e. copyright ownership) were not nailed down like Java. On the other hand, there's a lot of nobodies out there right now :). For GNU projects, the FSF wants to own all the copyrights to the code. They actually want you to legally assign the copyright to them. Their explanation for this onerous requirement is that if they were not the copyright holder, they would not have the legal standing to defend GPL violations, or would have to coordinate with a ton of developers, making such legal defenses practically impossible. Python is in a different situation, IMO, because it has a /less/ restrictive license than the GPL, so there's less to get all huffy about in court. If someone builds a binary-only proprietary blend of Python and starts selling it without source code, well, there's no license violation there, so what's to defend? The argument has been made that without clear legal title, someone could claim that some of the donated code in Python violated a copyright or patent and try to stop 3rd parties from using Python. Who knows what the actual legal possibility of that happening are, but I don't see how 1) we could take any real defense against this or 2) it affects Python any differently than any other large multi-contributor open source system. -Barry

...

...

...

...

"GS" == Greg Stein writes:

GS> On Wed, Jun 07, 2000 at 05:33:10PM +0300, Moshe Zadka wrote:

...

On Wed, 7 Jun 2000, Greg Ward wrote:

...

CNRI has absolutely no moral right to it (although probably some legal > right), I'd prefer to sign it away to Guido. Or optionally, to some > legal fiction that represents the Python community; preferably *not* the > Python Consortium, as long as CNRI is in any way connected.

Who's in charge of the PSA?

GS> CNRI GS> Effectively, the PSA is a legal fiction for collecting donations GS> to further the development of Python. The Consortium is similar, GS> but members have the actual/explicit capability to steer GS> Python's development. I believe this ability to steer the GS> development is (was?) rooted in the fact that CNRI employed GS> Guido. I have no idea how that will work now -- the "steering" GS> will (essentially) have to rely entirely on Guido's good GS> graces. Guido is an excellent listener to people's needs, so GS> there is no immediate problem here. The description of the PSA isn't exactly right. The PSA FAQ has an official explanation, which may not be right either, but at least it's what CNRI wants you to think. (And it may be right; I don't mean to suggest a nefarious plot, just that the relationship is convoluted enough that the explanation could be wrong.) http://www.python.org/psa/FAQ.html An abbreviated version follows: |Where does the money from membership fees go and who pays the rest? | | The money goes towards the salary of those who maintain and | coordinate the Python web site, ftp server, mailing lists, | conference expenses etc.... The case for these expenditures is | that a seed community is being incubated. CNRI officers and | directors see proof of the existence of such a community from the | fact that some members of that community are willing to pay some | of their own money to foster the activity. | |Who funds Python's development? | PSA fees do not fund the Python development effort.... CNRI is no longer maintaining python.org, although it still owns the domain and maintains the equipment it runs on. The existence of a community should be obvious now, without the need for people to pay money to prove it. Jeremy