- From: Ian B. Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 19:00:30 +0000
- To: fantasai <fantasai@inkedblade.net>
- Cc: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>, team-legal <team-legal@w3.org>, w3c-css-wg@w3.org, www-archive@w3.org
On Fri, 2008-04-25 at 22:03 +0000, fantasai wrote: Hi Fantasai, I have only a couple of comments, and not ones that address your main requests. > 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. Submitting the form sends an email which is archived, so we have a dated record of contributions. So mostly we need to keep track of changes to the form. > 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. +1 to a checkbox. _ Ian > ~fantasai > -- Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs/ Tel: +1 718 260-9447
Received on Monday, 28 April 2008 19:01:05 UTC