[antlr-interest] submission of patches, fixes, other contributions

[Gerald B. Rosenberg]

Lots of good discussion.  There are, however, a number of issues that 
should not be glazed over too quickly:

First off, be aware that Terence's initial query specifically concerned an 
contributor's license agreement.  Licenses such as the BSD, AFL and EPL are 
structured for use by an entity like the Antlr Project to license out 
aggregated contributions.  The suggestion to consider the JCA is a good one.

Even if applicable, be aware that the BSD, AFL and EPL are really very 
different in the areas significant to Terence.  While short and neat, the 
BSD license leaves many issues completely un-addressed.

The AFL was purposefully designed to be comprehensive to the issues, but it 
purposefully puts the entire risk and liability of error on the 
licensor/distributor.  Given that it is a "free" license, the licensor is 
not collecting anything of economic value that could be used to cover this 
accumulated risk.  Under the AFL, even a threat of litigation would likely 
be sufficient, in a practical sense, to shutter an open source vendor.

Conversely, the EPL places the entire risk on the end user -- the people at 
the greatest distance and with the least knowledge and often the least 
ability to exercise recourse for anything wrongfully contributed.  As 
Terence has experienced, large(r) corporations particularly do not like 
these types of licenses (for software they are licensing in) due to the 
burden and uncertainty of even attempting to verify the original 
contributions.

The questions raised about the warrantee/indemnity clause have caused 
Terence to question keeping it.  The suggestion is that it is 
chilling.  Well, actually, I believe that is a good thing.  The great 
strength of the open source community are the contributors.  Not just in 
terms of the nature and quality of the software they produce, but also of 
their awareness of the larger business issues and willingness to discuss, 
evaluate, and educate others in them.

With free software, it is almost by definition impossible to balance 
economic risk.  Therefore, the one best place to prevent the contribution 
of legally encumbered code is at the very outset.  Anyone not savvy or 
experienced enough to understand the consequences of a particular 
contribution should be cautioned to raise the appropriate questions prior 
to making the contribution.  To that end, Terence's warrantee clause is 
appropriate.

(Yes, I am a lawyer.  No, this should not be taken as specific legal 
advise.  Yes, I am a user of Antlr.  No, I do not represent Antlr, etc.)

Best,
Gerald

----
Gerald B. Rosenberg, Esq.
NewTechLaw
285 Hamilton Avenue, Suite 520
Palo Alto, CA  94301-2576

650.325.2100  (office)  /  650.703.1724  (cell)
650.325.2107  (fax)

www.newtechlaw.com