W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > April 2008

Test Suite License Grant II

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 15:14:18 -0700
Message-ID: <481257BA.1010704@inkedblade.net>
To: www-archive@w3.org

[copy www-archive; original to team-legal]

You've updated the license grant form under the old URL.
   http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/1/testgrants2-200409/?login
I hope you're keeping track of which contributors filled out the previous
version vs. this version.

I have some comments:

   # The Contributor hereby grants to the W3C, a perpetual, non-exclusive,
   # royalty-free, world-wide right and license under any Contributor
   # copyrights in this contribution to copy, publish, use, modify, and
   # to distribute the contribution under a BSD License or more restrictive,
   # as well as a right and license of the same scope to any derivative
   # works prepared by the W3C and based on, or incorporating all or part
   # of the contribution.

"to copy, publish, use, modify, and to distribute" is not parallel construction.
It's not clear what the intent is. Did you mean
   "to copy, publish, use, and modify the contribution and to distribute the
   contribution under a BSD License"
or
   "to copy, publish, use, modify, and distribute the contribution under a
   BSD License"
? The latter restricts W3C's copy/publish/use/modify rights to the terms
of the BSD License.

"or more restrictive" seems to be unfinished. Perhaps you meant "a more
restrictive license". Is it clear, legally, what "a more restrictive license"
means?

   # The Contributor further agrees that any derivative works of this
   # contribution prepared by the W3C shall be solely owned by the W3C.

This sentence has always bothered me. This sentence basically says that
if W3C modifies a contributor's test suite, the W3C owns the new version
in its entirety -- it basically strips away the contributor's copyright
ownership. It would make more sense, and be more in line with the previous
sentence, if it says that the changes W3C makes are owned by W3C. (Or if
it were removed entirely.)

Last thing, it would be nice if there was an optional checkbox that allowed
contributors to give W3C joint copyright ownership of the test, similar to
the way the Membership agreement does. Many contributors would be happy to
check off that box, but wouldn't bother to take that extra step if it
required emailing W3C and discussing it with Ian Jacobs, which is the
current process.

~fantasai
Received on Friday, 25 April 2008 22:15:20 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 7 November 2012 14:18:14 GMT