Contributor's waiver of rights is probably not legal under Belgian law

[nortti0]

In section 4. Contributions of the license, you state

Waiver of Rights: You waive any rights to claim authorship of the contributions or to object to any distortion, mutilation, or other modifications of the contributions.

and in section 17. Miscellaneous

Governing Law and Jurisdiction: This License shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of Belgium. Any disputes arising out of or in connection with this License shall be subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts located in Brussels, Belgium.

However, it appears such a full waiver of moral rights is not possible in Belgian copyright law

A global waiver of the future exercise of moral rights is not valid under Belgian law. […] However, the author remains always entitled to oppose the distortion, mutilation or other alterations to his work, as well as any modification that may damage his honour or reputation.

[purplesyringa]

As far as I can see, it's illegal in Russia too:

https://www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LAW_64629/01cf40c9e42efacdb8dff7cdd410e2542bbbfdf4/

Право авторства - право признаваться автором произведения и право автора на имя - право использовать или разрешать использование произведения под своим именем, под вымышленным именем (псевдонимом) или без указания имени, то есть анонимно, неотчуждаемы и непередаваемы, в том числе при передаче другому лицу или переходе к нему исключительного права на произведение и при предоставлении другому лицу права использования произведения. Отказ от этих прав ничтожен.

The right of authorship - the right to be recognized as the author of a work and the author's right to a name - the right to use or permit the use of a work under one's own name, under a fictitious name (pseudonym) or without specifying a name, i.e. anonymously, are inalienable and non-transferable, including when transferring to another person or passing to him the exclusive right to the work and when granting another person the right to use the work. Waiver of these rights is null and void.

In fact, I'm pretty sure this is the case in a lot more countries, that's something close to basic human rights.

[morsik]

AFAIR Same here in Poland. Copyrights are inalienable.

Polish original:

prawa autorskie osobiste są niezbywalne

And that simply means: you can have whatever you write in your license, and it simply won't be applied to us as law is more important.

[sebastian-meyer]

As far as I know this is the case for all countries of the European Union.

[jakubtalich]

Illegal in the Czech Republic as well.

[kaetemi]

License written by ChatGPT. (:

[t3duk]

[Googulator]

The definition of "conveyance" in this license seems to be derived from GPLv3, but the referenced term "propagation" (also defined in the GPL) is missing.

Coincidentally, this is exactly what I would expect if this license is indeed AI-generated.

[nortti0]

I am aware that I opened this can of worms by opening this issue, but can we please keep discussion on this issue on-topic? If there are other issues to discuss, you should open separate issues on them.

IANAL, but as far as I can tell this is just a some shoddiness in the license. The license would still be valid otherwise, with the severance clause, it's just that this specific section could not be enforced.

[Gwindalmir]

IANAL, but I don't think "authorship" is the same as copyright.
If you work for a company doing work for them, you can typically still say "I wrote that feature" even if you don't own the copyright (as copyright for work-for-hire works are typically assigned to the hiring entity).

The way this is worded however, seems like I can't even say "oh, I fixed that window snapping issue".. despite the fact the commit history would clearly show my name on that change.

They, in effect, want "work-for-hire" applied to non-billed community contributions.

[alula]

Well, that's what CLAs are for :)

[purplesyringa]

At least in the US, a work is only considered work-for-hire if an employee-employer relationship (or equivalent) exists. IANAL, but the way I see it, this can only be the case if:

• The contributor tells the maintainer they desire to implement a feature before implementing it,
• The two sign a written agreement explicitly containing the words "work for hire",
• The contributor is paid.

There's no way in hell this is possible in the OSS world. No CLA is going to enable this.

[jacksongoode]

Please pick a standard license, custom licenses hinder engagement from the open source community and arguably damage its health.

https://ben.balter.com/2016/08/01/why-you-shouldnt-write-your-own-open-source-license/