Slashdot Mirror
Doing Open-Source Development, Anonymously?
An anonymous reader asks: "I have some free time, and I've recently started looking into some open-source projects that I'd like to start working on. (I'm a great fan of open-source. A package that I wrote four years ago, and which shall remain un-named, is probably running on you Linux system). But I have a problem: I strongly suspect that my after-hours work might be 'frowned upon' by my employer, and although I have no contractual commitment to abstain from such work, and I will not use office-computers or anything, I realize that in these times it might get me into trouble. So I figured I'll use an assumed identity. However, in order to release copyleft software, you have to first claim copyright to it, and this is not likely to legaly hold for an assumed identity. I don't want to release to the public-domain either. So what can I do?"
It would not hurt to ask. If that does not work, maybe you could find a friend and give them the copyright to the program.
Note that they will ask if your employer can have any copyright (or other) claim on your program and if that is the case you will still have to ask them for permission (and the FSF will ask for a signed confirmation that what you do is OK).
Just email them at assing@gnu.org.
If you absolutely want to do this behind your employers back, then you could release it as public domain (why won't you consider that?). Or you could assign copyright to a friend, who will keep you anonymous in return. If you don't have any friends, assign copyright to the FSF, I'm sure they would agree to try to keep you anonymous. That's about it.
I beg to differ. I've worked places that frown on OSS development, even on personal time (although the owner thought that MRTG was built by a company called Global Village. Needless to say, this was a strict NT shop...) Anyway, his concern may well be legitimate. The best guidance I can give you is to talk to two types of legal weasel: the employment kind, and the copyright kind. If you can deal with only one, more power to you, but you should definitely consider solid legal counsel.
There in Sweden, you could mail yourself a bunch of empty, open envelopes and then put whatever you want in them later.
J'aime mieux les méchants que les imbéciles, parce qu'ils se reposent. -- Alexandre Dumas
The literary history is full of pseudonyms, assumed identities, and secret double lifes. These must provide legal precedent on how to publish without tarnishing your good name, and yet be able to claim authorship once your name so wel established that it doesn't matter, or so badly tarnished anyway that it doesn't matter. Consult a good lawyer, or if you can not afford one, someone who knows the history of literature...
In Murphy We Turst
WRONG, the EULA would not be enforcible because they never had the right to license the software under a EULA in the first place, as they based their software around GPL'ed code.
Ignoring someone else's GPL'ed license and slapping a EULA around a mod/addition to a GPL'ed program is not legit, and is completely null and void. The people who EULA'ed it would be lying; the code is actually licensed under the GPL.
Stealing something that belongs to someone else and putting your name on it doesn't make it your's.
social sciences can never use experience to verify their statemen
I think the concern is getting burned by the employer despite there being no moral or legal obligation to not participate in outside projects.
I personally find it rather upsetting that employers have the attitude that because you work for them, they own your ass-- thus forcing people like the poster to resort to anonymity in order to donate their time for the benefit of society. What a chilling effect it would have on the world if every employer cracked down on their employees from lending their professional expertise to causes on their own time. I imagine that would be the end of many charitable organizations...