commit: 1ac216c1878255dc0e6071b77fece6a5f638998f parent 65fbda1f138a375a4e47e76ce7533ec1e139d599 Author: Drew DeVault <sir@cmpwn.com> Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2023 15:17:52 +0100 On "real name" policiesDiffstat:
| A | content/blog/On-real-names.md | 94 | +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ |
1 file changed, 94 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)diff --git a/content/blog/On-real-names.md b/content/blog/On-real-names.md@@ -0,0 +1,94 @@ +--- +title: On "real name" policies +date: 2023-10-31 +--- + +Some free software projects reject anonymous or pseudonymous contributions, +requiring you to author patches using your "real name". Such projects have a +so-called "real name" policy; Linux is one well-known example.[^1] + +[^1]: A [change to Linux policy][1] earlier this year refines their approach to + alleviate the concerns raised in this article. + +[1]: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=d4563201f33a022fc0353033d9dfeb1606a88330 + +The root motivations behind such policies vary, but in my experience the most +often cited rationale is that it's important to establish the provenance of the +contribution for copyright reasons. In the case of Linux, contributors are asked +to "sign-off" their commits to indicate their agreement to the terms of the +Developer Certificate of Origin (DCO), which includes clauses like the +following: + +> The contribution was created in whole or in part by me and I have the right to +> submit it under the open source license indicated in the file. + +To some extent, the DCO serves as a legal assertion of copyright and an +agreement to license a work under given copyright terms (GPLv2 in the case of +Linux). This record also means that the author of the code is accountable in +case the copyright is challenged; in the case of an anonymous or pseudonymous +contributor you're shit out of luck. At that point, liability over the +disagreement would likely fall into the hands of the maintainer that accepted +the contribution. It is reasonable for a maintainer to ask a contributor to +assert their copyright and accept liability over the provenance of their code in +a legally meaningful and accountable form. + +The possibility that someone may have something useful to offer to a free +software project, but is not comfortable disclosing their name for any number of +reasons, is a reasonable supposition. A maintainer whose "real name" policy is +challenged on this basis would also be reasonable in saying "I feel for you, but +I cannot agree to accept legal liability over the provenance of this code, +nor can I communicate that risk to end-users who acquire code under a license +that may or may not be valid as such". + +"Real name" policies are controversial in the free software community. I open +with this perspective in an attempt to cool down the room. Those who feel +marginalized by "real name" policies often skew young, and many treat matters +such as copyright and licensing with disdain. Moreover, the problem tends to +inflame deeply hurtful sentiments and raise thorny matters of identity and +discrimination, and it's easy to construe the intent of the policymakers as the +intent to cause harm. The motivations behind these policies are reasonable. + +That said, intent or otherwise, these policies can cause harm. The profile of +the contributor who is comfortable using their "real name" is likely to fall +more narrowly into over-represented demographics in our community; enforcing a +real-name policy will ostracize some people. Those with marginalized identities +tend to be less comfortable with disclosing their "real name". Someone who has +been subject to harassment may not be comfortable with this disclosure, since it +offers more fuel to harassers keeping tabs on their activities. The use of a +"real name" also confers a gender bias; avoiding a "real name" policy neatly +eliminates discrimination on this basis. Of course, there are also many +[falsehoods programmers believe about names][0] which can present in the +implementation of such a policy. + +[0]: https://www.kalzumeus.com/2010/06/17/falsehoods-programmers-believe-about-names/ + +There is also one particular problem which has been at the heart of conflict +surrounding the use of "real-name" policies in free software: transgender +identities. A transgender person is likely to change their name in the process +of assuming their new identity. When this happens, their real name changes. +However, it may or may not match their legal name -- some trans people opt to +change it, others don't; if they do it is a process that takes time. Meanwhile, +addressing a trans person by their old name, or "deadname", is highly +uncomfortable. Doing so deliberately, as a matter of policy or otherwise, is a +form of discrimination. Many trans people experience deliberate "deadnaming" as +a form of harassment in their daily lives, and institutionalizing this behavior +is cruel. + +The truth is, managing the names of participants is more challenging than anyone +would like. On the one hand, names establish accountability and facilitate +collaboration, and importantly, credit the authors of a work for services +performed. On the other hand, names are highly personal and deeply affecting, +and their usage and changes over time are the subject of important consideration +at the discretion of their owner. A complicating factor is that handling names +properly introduces technical problems which must be overcome. + +To embrace the advantages of "real name" policies -- establishing provenance, +encouraging accountability, fostering a social environment -- without causing +harm, the approach I have settled on for my projects is to use the DCO to +establish provenance and encourage contributors to sign-off and participate +under the identity they feel most comfortable with. I encourage people to +utilize an identity they use beyond the project's walls, to foster a social +environment and a connection to the broader community, to establish +accountability, and to ensure that participants are reachable for further +discussion on their work. If a contributor's identity changes, we make every +effort to support this change in contemporary, future, and historical use.