&gt; <i>Neither of those are CLAs</i><p>I see your point now, but the steps are functionally equivalent. The person committing the code has to verify that it&#x27;s licensable by the contributor under MPL2.0, which means copyright license, patent grant, etc.<p>The specific terms, however are down to the author of CLAs, not inherent to CLAs themselves. The Apache and the Google CLAs are fine, for instance, and look roughly equivalent to the terms of MPL 2.0.<p>I can see the user friendliness argument, but functionally it&#x27;s the same thing. The swift CONTRIBUTING.md could just as easily put in some crazy line about patent negotiations.<p>&gt; <i>They usually take away a lot of the contributors&#x27; bargaining power. Microsoft&#x27;s CLAs included.</i><p>Can you point out which part you object to specifically? On a quick read I don&#x27;t see anything in here[1] that&#x27;s not the equivalent of licensing your code to a project under a major OS license with a patent grant (e.g. Apache 2.0).<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;cla.microsoft.com&#x2F;cladoc&#x2F;microsoft-contribution-license-agreement.pdf" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;cla.microsoft.com&#x2F;cladoc&#x2F;microsoft-contribution-lice...</a>