Open Source CLAs
Debates on Contributor License Agreements (CLAs) in open source projects, their legal implications for copyright assignment, requirements by companies like Atlassian and Audacity, and alternatives like forking or avoiding such projects.
Activity Over Time
Top Contributors
Keywords
Sample Comments
It's pretty normal for open source projects to refuse contributions from anyone who hasn't signed a CLA or something similar. The alternative is a legal nightmare.
Why are you contributing to projects with CLAs if you disagree with their terms?
Why don't they take contributions? They couldn't do a CLA?
Can you name one open source project, where I can commit a change the maintainer doesn't agree with?
Would be even better if they didn't require a CLA to contribute.
If you contribute to any open contribution project by Apple, Google, Microsoft, Facebook, etc. you’ll have to sign a CLA first, however minor the PR is. Same goes for some non-corporate projects, e.g. CPython. There are readily made forms and enforcement bots for CLAs at least within the GitHub ecosystem, so you can even deploy them to your one man project within an hour; it’s also not hard to write the tools from scratch, especially considering that drh wrote his own SCM. Therefore, keeping tra
Sounds like contributors should create a community fork then. Yeah, it sure does give away a lot of your rights when you sign a CLA...
This is owned by Atlassian. After you submit a pull request they send you a huge contributor agreement saying that all your contributions are owned by Atlassian. Fuck that.
It’s hard to find but contributors are required to sign a CLA which allows the project owner to do what they want with the code.https://www.audacityteam.org/cla/
They haven't made contributors sign a CLA so no, they aren't legally in a position to do the same move.