BLU Discuss list archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Discuss] Ubiquiti Networks is creatively violating the GPL
- Subject: [Discuss] Ubiquiti Networks is creatively violating the GPL
- From: smallm at panix.com (Mike Small)
- Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2015 10:53:56 -0400
- In-reply-to: <CANaytcfQYZZfmoZjkaMVgPvspiNZKDVNPPPThcTPyQw8YC60Pw@mail.gmail.com> (Greg Rundlett's message of "Fri, 10 Apr 2015 10:04:04 -0400")
- References: <55256757.4030806@gmail.com> <CANaytcdPj-8VKtYpViVXbZ2VBes0WZP4WD7+e=n1h2o39Y0kfA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJFsZ=onkubLswqoYkqV=sU1rmsahnQBOsn0N=S2eLz62xHaDw@mail.gmail.com> <CANaytcfQYZZfmoZjkaMVgPvspiNZKDVNPPPThcTPyQw8YC60Pw@mail.gmail.com>
"Greg Rundlett (freephile)" <greg at freephile.com> writes: > Assignment of copyright (to the FSF) is NOT automatic. It's something you > have to do (another hurdle in making software free, AND defensible). One interesting thing to me about copyright assignment and the paperwork some GNU projects require for it is how it could bring to a head how grasping the wording of your company's "invention assignment agreement" is. The company I work for happens to be based out of California, so their policy on this filters through a certain California labour law, one that leaves room for a person to contribute to free software as long as it isn't done on company time or facilities. (Er, there may be a little more in there about whether you're directly competing with your company's direct business or something like that but it's a pretty nice law all the same as I recall.) Massachusetts, as far as I know, has no law like it. I wonder about this when I think about moving on. I don't think companies are necessarily trying to be jerks about it. But without a law you have to think lawyers over time are going to opt for the maximal position for their clients, one that says they own everything you do night or day while they pay you. I wonder how many patches are flying around under this kind of contract. Can't imagine the law improving here anytime soon either. Maybe if Senator Brownsberger ever gets his anti-compete reform through he could be persuaded to take this one up? But even that, being modest and fair as seems to me his way, has been largely stonewalled by interested parties, yes? -- Mike Small smallm at panix.com
- Follow-Ups:
- [Discuss] Ubiquiti Networks is creatively violating the GPL
- From: greg at freephile.com (Greg Rundlett (freephile))
- [Discuss] Ubiquiti Networks is creatively violating the GPL
- References:
- [Discuss] Ubiquiti Networks is creatively violating the GPL
- From: tmetro+blu at gmail.com (Tom Metro)
- [Discuss] Ubiquiti Networks is creatively violating the GPL
- From: greg at freephile.com (Greg Rundlett (freephile))
- [Discuss] Ubiquiti Networks is creatively violating the GPL
- From: bogstad at pobox.com (Bill Bogstad)
- [Discuss] Ubiquiti Networks is creatively violating the GPL
- From: greg at freephile.com (Greg Rundlett (freephile))
- [Discuss] Ubiquiti Networks is creatively violating the GPL
- Prev by Date: [Discuss] Ubiquiti Networks is creatively violating the GPL
- Next by Date: [Discuss] Ubiquiti Networks is creatively violating the GPL
- Previous by thread: [Discuss] Ubiquiti Networks is creatively violating the GPL
- Next by thread: [Discuss] Ubiquiti Networks is creatively violating the GPL
- Index(es):