again, I fail to see how a "joint ownership" deal wouldn't help here.

"Joint Owners" would be "Contributor" and "The NetBSD Foundation".

Once assigned, the Contributor could not dictate what TNF could do, nor
could TNF dictate further use of what the Contributor could do with the code.
At first glance, one might think "CONFLICT OF INTEREST".  I think,
"not at all", since it means that even though the Contributor might later
change the copyright on the code, the code as given to TNF still had the
old copyright, and would win on precedent, i.e. if I contribute to TNF
and then later copyleft my code (not bloody likely given my misregard for
RMS!), TNF would not be obligated to follow that course of action as well.
Similarly, were TNF to copyleft the code for whatever insane reason
were to possess them at the time, I would not be required to make my code
available under the same terms.  $A could sell/assign/do whatever with
the code without regard to $B.

In short, you have a code split established at the time of the copyright
"assignment".  It is up to both parties to agree, however formally or in-
formally, to keep the code in sync.  As long as both parties agree with
the direction of $PROJECT, sync is easy.  If they disagree, $A and $B
are free to take $CODE in completely different directions.

Bringing in the idea of derivate works becomes moot because the contract
is agreed upon at the time of copyright assignment.

Bringing in the idea of intellectual property is grounds for shooting someone,
IMNSHO, but that's another *(can_of_worms *(*(*)()))->open() that I
don't want to call.


Of course I could just be blowing some smoke -- if I am, _please_ don't
rub my face in sandpaper again.  I'm just trying to help out.



				--*greywolf;
--
Microsoft Windows NT -- "What a totally excellent discovery...NOT!"