Have You Seen These (Mozilla) Hackers?

Gerv writes: "mozilla.org are in the last stages of the Mozilla relicensing project (from [MN]PL to a [MN]PL/LGPL/GPL tri-license), but are still looking for a number of Mozilla contributors to ask them for permission to relicense. They want the help of the community in tracking them down. Have you seen these hackers?"

Re:front page please...

[Gerv]

Thanks for your concern - actually, we've had such a good response from the close Mozilla community that front-page Slashdot exposure now would be serious overkill.

Gerv

Easy way to find them

[anthony_dipierro]

Change the license. When someone sues, you've found them.

Maybe...

[Scott Wood]

Maybe this will make some people consider using a simpler, freer license the next time they're looking for something to use on their free software. Unless, of course, they think that partitioning free software into incompatible license domains is a *good* thing... Thanks a lot, RMS.

Personally, I'd hate for my own code to be rendered useless because it's tied to a piece of software that can't interoperate with some other piece of software I (or anyone else) want to use due to licensing issues.

Re:Maybe...

[Gerv]

Maybe this will make some people consider using a simpler, freer license

Those are very loaded words. Not everyone can have maximum freedom.

For example, a user's freedom to do anything they like with the code (a BSD-style license) means they can take away another user's freedom to do the same (close the source.)

On the other hand, a programmer's freedom to keep the code open (GPL license) takes away the user's freedom to close the source.

There is no way everyone can have all possible freedoms, because they are mutually exclusive. Whether you release your stuff under the GPL license or the BSD license depends on whether you think the initial user's freedom, all user's freedoms, or the programmer's freedom should be paramount. All viewpoints are valid.

Mozilla.org wishes to make Mozilla code available to GPLed apps while still keeping copyleft protections at MPL level or better. Hence the relicensing project.

Gerv

Re:Maybe...

[iangoldby]

a user's freedom to do anything they like with the code (a BSD-style license) means they can take away another user's freedom to do the same (close the source.)

Sorry, I don't get it. If Fred takes something written under the BSD license, makes some alterations and closes the source, how is that taking someone else's freedom away? What have they lost that they would have had if Fred had never been involved?

The point I'm making is that the version that Fred forked away from still exists and is still open for anyone to use under the BSD license. Fred might not have added anything, but he's not removed anything either.

IMO, the BSD license seems to give everyone freedom, but does however allow the possibility of someone benefitting from another's work without giving anything back. I can understand that this may feel wrong to some people - hence the GPL. But I don't see a freedom issue here.

Law questions

[kilrogg]

Some of these people seem to have played very minor roles ("Minor wording improvements", "Added gcc check for -pthreads if -pthread check fails."...), are they still considered copyright holders?

Secondly, if all best attempts are made to contact the people on the list but they are not found, is that good enough in the eye of the law to go ahead without their permission? Perhaps in the next mozilla build they should show the list the first time mozilla starts up after install, chances are the people who contributed still use mozilla.

Re:Law questions

[Gerv]

Whether they are copyright holders or not may be fuzzy legally, but morally, we think it's only fair to make a good effort to find them before we assess whether we can use their contributions regardless or not.

Whether we can go ahead without their permission does depend on the magnitude of the contribution, but there is no clear delimiter between "allowed" and "not allowed".

Gerv

Re:Law questions

[Crusty Old Socks Man]

I don't know almost anything about any laws, but changing a single letter is just as much a contribution as a hundred thousand letters! And if you can't find them, obviously they don't want anything to do with Mozilla anymore. So watch out, or there might be a class-action suit against you.
I'll bet that all the missing people work for Microsoft now anyways. Watch your back.

Re:Law questions

[Artik Vodka]

In those cases that someone just wrote a simple/quick fix, like

• if ( error_condition ) {
• 
  ignore_this ( one );
  backup_that ( one );
  return 0;
  }
  

If they refuse to allow the licence change or if you don't seam to be able to find them, can't you [isn't it simpler ?] just ask someone else to write a similar fix, to avoid any CopyRight issues ?

Re:Law questions

[Gerv]

Yes, you can - normally, you'd create a version of the file without their code and tell someone who'd never seen it: "It needs to do X", where X is what the code used to do.

Gerv

How to find some hackers in 3 easy steps.

[Treeluvinhippy]

1. Walk into a large cubicle farm that has a shitload of people. Has to be a tech company. This trick will work in other types of farms like those at large accounting houses, but we are specifically looking for hackers.

2. Yell "FBI! Everybody stay calm and in your cubicle. We will walk around and ask each one of you in turn some questions. There is nothing to be worried about. So please remain where you are until we speak with you."

3. All the bearded fatguys making a break for the emergency exits and windows (if your not to high up) are hackers. Also investigate the cubicles and look for the ones who will be hiding under desks, wiping harddrives, eating cds, etc.

Re:How to find some hackers in 3 easy steps.

[iangoldby]

Especially go after the guy who just received a parcel containing a mobile phone and is now standing outside on the window ledge.

This could be a problem

[JanneM]

I've thought about this sort of problem. It's great when a lot of people rally around a project. Some do a lot of work, some do just a little (though that is usually very appreciated as well). The problem comes when you for one reason or another need to figure out who did what afterwards.

There could be many reasons for this need - some trivial, some serious. The current Mozilla thing is one, of course. A serious one could be for projects attempting to reverse-engineer an existing technology (be it .NET, Samba, the Windows API or whatever). If someone 'sneaks' on board with exposure to the original code, it can be vital to identify what parts that person has worked on, so they can be examined, and if necessary removed. A silly (or perhaps not so silly) example could be someone having his or her contributions as a reference for a job application or similar. It would be very helpful if that person could point to a log showing exactly what they did (and how the community reacted to it).

Bottom line: we might want to start thinking about how to keep better track of such stuff. While a few larger projects (such as Mozilla) are already doing this to some extent, I believe many smaller projects are lucky to have an accurate list of names, never mind actual logs of the contributions.

/Janne