Re: Contributor Clauses in Licenses
Pamela Chestek <[email protected]> Mon, 8 Dec 2025 16:27:28 -0800
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.licenses.open-source.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
--===============5603566770642001262== Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 12/8/2025 4:06 PM, Josh Berkus wrote: > On 12/8/25 3:43 PM, Pamela Chestek wrote: >> As to Josh's comment "No text contained within the license can >> enforce that my PR is under that license," I disagree. When I created >> my contribution I necessarily accepted the terms of the outbound >> license, or at least I am hard-pressed to think of a way that someone >> made a contribution that matters but would not have taken an action >> that requires acceptance of the license. > > I can think of lots of ways to make a meaningful contribution without > having either run or redistributed the software: > > - Someone contributing grammar corrections to the docs or website > without using the software > > - Someone offering to naturalize the documentation based on a > translation framework, which also doesn't require using the software > > - Someone building a code contribution based on a differently licensed > version of the same software (if, for example, it's available under a > proprietary license as well) > > - Someone submitting 3rd-party dependency version updates without > running the software (like, for example, DependaBot does, and humans > do this as well). > > - A graphics designer submitting a change to graphics or UI design > created entirely with design programs. > > I'm sure there's other situations I haven't thought of. Are most > contributions based on the contributor having first downloaded and run > the software under the license? Sure. But definitely not all of them. > Assuming the non-software bits are under the open source license, if I am contributing grammar corrections, naturalizing the documentation or submitting changes to UI, I am creating a derivative work of those works. Submitting 3rd-party dependency version updates is not making a copyrightable contribution, so no license enforcement is implicated. You got me on the code contribution based on having accepted a proprietary license. But how often does that actually happen? The point remains that inbound = outbound isn't enforceable against them either. Pam Pamela S. Chestek Chestek Legal 4641 Post St. Unit 4316 El Dorado Hills, CA 95762 +1 919-800-8033 [email protected] www.chesteklegal.com --===============5603566770642001262== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18KVGhlIG9waW5p b25zIGV4cHJlc3NlZCBpbiB0aGlzIGVtYWlsIGFyZSB0aG9zZSBvZiB0aGUgc2VuZGVyIGFuZCBu b3QgbmVjZXNzYXJpbHkgdGhvc2Ugb2YgdGhlIE9wZW4gU291cmNlIEluaXRpYXRpdmUuIE9mZmlj aWFsIHN0YXRlbWVudHMgYnkgdGhlIE9wZW4gU291cmNlIEluaXRpYXRpdmUgd2lsbCBiZSBzZW50 IGZyb20gYW4gb3BlbnNvdXJjZS5vcmcgZW1haWwgYWRkcmVzcy4KCkxpY2Vuc2UtZGlzY3VzcyBt YWlsaW5nIGxpc3QKTGljZW5zZS1kaXNjdXNzQGxpc3RzLm9wZW5zb3VyY2Uub3JnCmh0dHA6Ly9s aXN0cy5vcGVuc291cmNlLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL2xpY2Vuc2UtZGlzY3Vzc19saXN0 cy5vcGVuc291cmNlLm9yZwo= --===============5603566770642001262==--