[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Under 18, Wants to contribute



On Feb 4, 2008 4:27 AM, Karsten 'quaid' Wade <kwade redhat com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2008-02-04 at 07:11 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Feb 02, 2008 at 08:03:08AM -0800, Karsten 'quaid' Wade wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > If the CLA does not mention age, then we have pretty much commented on
> > > the subject as much as we can.
> >
> > this matter turns up quite often, and we should have some standard
> > answer, hopefully in a positive way. Otherwise everyone will have a
> > different dealing with this situation and it will often escalate into
> > f-a-b (which doesn't really resolve this, yet).
> >
> > No, I'm not favouring Fedora Child Labour, I'm demanding it! ;)
>
> Axel:
>
> Yes, this is true.  My concern, to be honest, is that if we start asking
> questions of the lawyers, we might get back answers. :)
>
> For example, what if we get back the answer, "If you are under the age
> of 18 in the USA, you need a parent's signature"?  Where before we
> didn't have any such rule, now we have a rule *and* an unknown number of
> current contributors might be suddenly out of compliance.

Is this safer than turning a blind eye to it, and finding out we can
be sued later?  I think it would be smarter to ask the lawyers,
knowing full well that we'll need a sane plan if they say no to anyone
under 18 without additional paperwork.  It's just one boring chore
that could save our butts down the road.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]