I don't want to add to this discussion, but when plain errors are written, I have to. I thought you were a lawyer ?

http://files.pharo.org/media/PharoSoftwareDistributionAgreement.pdf

<< The Parties agree that Supplier has contributed source code (the ���Supplier���s Code���) for the open source software known as ���Pharo��� (the ���Software���), and that Supplier retains all rights in and to Supplier���s Code, aside from the rights expressly granted to Distributor in this Agreement. The Parties acknowledge that the Software in its entirety is a collective work containing source code contributions from several authors, and that Supplier���s Code is only a small component part of the Software work as a whole.
Supplier hereby grants Distributor a perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive, royalty-free, worldwide license to distribute the Software, and specifically the Supplier���s Code therein, to end users, subject to the license agreement commonly known as the ���MIT License��� >>

Nowhere it says that you lose your copyright !!

Furthermore, this is a very simple document with no hidden agenda, it is a consequence of using the MIT license.

> On 08 Dec 2015, at 10:54, Dimitris Chloupis <kilon.alios@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The one thing I dont like about that agreement is that it forces to retreat from the personal copyright if I remember the document correctly. Even though personally I would not mind that for bug fixes and small enhancements where my copyright would not be so much of a big deal. For bigger tools and code that I have put substantial effort and suffered pain to make them work I would not give away my copyright. So I am not seeing myself signing this any time soon either.
>
> Revealing my real name and some other stuff is not a problem.
>
> So I can certainly understand some of your frustration webwarrior.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 10:44 AM phil@highoctane.be <phil@highoctane.be> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 12:47 AM, webwarrior <reg@webwarrior.ws> wrote:
> Considering that there are a couple of responses and the fact that you
> guys are so easily offended, I will not answer everyone but just state
> couple of theses.
>
>
> 0. I will not reveal my real name, because I value privacy. Nickname is
> sufficient for identification purposes. Any other information (real
> name, address, etc.) is not needed for actually contributing code. Think
> of principle of least privilege.
>
> 1. I could easily make up some human-looking name (Satoshi Nakamoto
> anyone?), but will not do it out of principle (see #0).
>
> 2. Knowing contributor's "real" name would not guard you against any
> possible malicious actions from him, because it can't be verified (see
> #1). One can also make up address, and even signature, if needed, and I
> bet no one would spot it.
>
> 3. I don't buy argument about requirements of some organizations. Linux
> kernel is used in billions of devices and by countless organizations,
> and I highly doubt that contributing to Linux requires anything like
> singing an agreement or whatever.
>
> You'd be surprised.
>
> 4. Even in paid services checking a checkbox is usually sufficient for
> accepting any license/ToS.
>
> 5. My intentions are mostly of pragmatic nature. To make things that I
> use (and that can be useful to Pharo users) be in upstream.
>
> 6. I don't care whether you drink beer, your political views, or your
> interpersonal relationships (however story with Benjamin shows that
> perhaps everything's not as great as you paint it). These are all
> irrelevant to Pharo development, from my point of view at least.
>
> 7. If you don't agree with my arguments and stick to your rules, go for
> it. I'm in no position to tell you what's the right thing to do. I'll
> just end this discussion and leave.
>
> Farewell then.
>
> Phil
>
>
> View this message in context: Re: License agreement - are you kidding me?
> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.