# Health of the Development Community

## Good License and Legal Requirements Choices

<a id="license-approved"></a>
Obviously, code that's not under a license that is both
[OSI approved](http://opensource.org/licenses/alphabetical) and is not
[approved by FSF as a Free Software license](http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#SoftwareLicenses)
is completely useless to us.

<a id="gpl-compatible"></a>
It would also be quite preferable if the code were under a
[a license that FSF has determined is GPL-compatible](http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#GPLCompatibleLicenses),
so that code from GPL'd projects can be easily shared and GPL'd applications
can be built on top of anything we build.  Code not under a GPL-compatible
license would face a high burden (i.e., the code would really have to be
absolutely wonderful in all other respects) to dictate such a license choice.

<a id="no-cla-for-profit"></a>
If the project has a CLA other than inbound=outbound, or has copyright
assignment, the beneficiary has to be a 501(c)(3) non-profit, as non-profit
contributors may not be legally permitted to give away code assets to a
for-profit entity or an entity with a different tax status.

Even for 501(c)(3)'s requesting a CLA or copyright assignment, there would
need to be a confirmation that the missions of the orgs were sufficiently
aligned.

Given that the project is going to solicit support and contributions from
501(c)(3)'s, this issue is particularly important.

## No Legal Barriers