decentralizing contributor license agreements
XLC Building Blocks
essential concepts and vocabulary for cross-license collaboratives
en:license [CoopCycle]
This License grants rights to study, execute, modify and redistribute the Software or its derivatives to any Licensee, but reserve the commercial use of these rights to the only entities defined in Article 3. Any redistribution or online interaction with the Software or its derivative must be done accordingly to the License’s conditions.
Decentralized Information and the Future of Software - Draft
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
CommonsCloud – Eines lliures tecnoètiques cooperatives
Eines lliures tecnoètiques cooperatives
Solving the Commercial Open Source Licensing Dilemma With Triple-Licensing
As you may have noticed, the move away from approved open source licenses to commercial almost-like-open-source licenses by single-vendor-owned open source projects has created a lot of bad press f…
Contributor Covenant | Contributor Covenant 3
The most widely adopted code of conduct in open source. Stewarded by the Organization for Ethical Source.
The Community Corrosive Effects of CLAs | James Bottomley's random Pages
As one of the kernel DCO advocates, I’ve written many times about using the DCO instead of a CLA for copyright and patent contributions under open source licences. In spite of my obvious biases, I’ll try to give a factual overview of the cases for the DCO and CLA system. First, it should be noted that both the DCO and any CLA are types of Contribution Agreements (a set of terms by which contributors are agreeing to be bound). It should also be acknowledged that the DCO is a far more recent invention than CLAs. The DCO was first pioneered by the Linux kernel in 2004 (having been designed by Diane Peters, then of OSDL) and was subsequently adopted by a broad range of open source projects. However, in legal terms, the DCO is much less well understood than a standard CLA type agreement between the contributor and some entity, which is largely the reason you find a number of lawyers still advocating for the use of CLAs in various open source projects: because they’d like to stick with something that has more miles on it, or because they’re invested in the older model of community, largely pioneered by Apache. The biggest problem today is that the operation of most CLAs is asymmetrical: they take from the contributor more rights than the open source code actually needs, so lets begin with a summary of each type of Contribution Agreement.
Everything an open source maintainer might need to know about open source licensing | Ben Balter
There's lots of internet lore around open source licensing. An attorney and open source developer answers the most common questions.
Reimagining OSS Licensing and Commercialization with Fair Source - Adam Jacob, System Initiative
An Open Licensing Organization for Open Source Software
What if open source software had an organization like ASCAP for distributing royalties?
Katerina Marchán (@zkat@toot.cat)
Open source maintainers of major projects (hi) are not ready to accept and talk about how the cultural insistence on permissive licensing is just straight up labor exploitation taking advantage of our addiction to popularity (also hi). We’re doing this to ourselves too, you know.