Re: Balsa: Indirect linking to OpenSSL via LGPL and OpenLDAP libs

[Andrew Lau <netsnipe debianplanet org>]

On Thu, Dec 19, 2002 at 06:55:27PM -0500, Peter Bloomfield wrote:
> Does debian legal have an opinion on how far a project needs to go,
> in getting agreement on such an exception?  Theirs would seem to be
> the pivotal decision.

Steve Langasek <vorlon at netexpress.net>:

	> how do you handle the problem of multiple copyrights ?

	In the case of projects with a large number of copyright
	holders, the normal procedure is to make a "reasonable effort"
	to contact all copyright holders to get their consent.  If you
	have a smaller number of significant contributors, it is
	obviously more important to get the consent of all
	contributors before modifying the license.

http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2002/debian-legal-200212/msg00200.html

	Well if Balsa 2 was written from a clean code base, then in my
opinion, those listed as the authors for it should be
sufficient. Would you like me to seek a further clarification of the
above? I'm not sure who is legally considered a "copyright holder" of
Balsa, but I guess it would include the main contributers.

Yours sincerely,
Andrew "Netsnipe" Lau

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Andrew "Netsnipe" Lau              Computer Science & Student Rep, UNSW *
*   # apt-get into it                 Debian GNU/Linux Package Maintainer *
*     <netsnipe(+)debianplanet.org\0>      <alau(+)cse.unsw.edu.au\0>     *
* GnuPG 1024D/2E8B68BD 0B77 73D0 4F3B F286 63F1  9F4A 9B24 C07D 2E8B 68BD *
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

PGP signature