Re: Proposed: evolution (copyright assignment)

ssshhh, I'm working on a time machine in my basement.


On Thu, 2004-07-22 at 10:15, Dan Winship wrote:
> On Thu, 2004-07-22 at 07:07 -0500, James M. Cape wrote:
> > Looking at the actual requirements, it appears as though copyright
> > assignment is only necessary for > 5-consecutive-line changes, so even
> > if aliens invade and burn down all the major cities... erm, Novell takes
> > Evo proprietary at some future date, they would still have to get
> > permission from every < 5-consecutive-line coder who submitted a patch
> > to Evo, a daunting task in and of itself. AFAIK, only one of those
> > people must say "nope" for the whole deal to be nixed, so I don't really
> > see it as an issue.
> IANAL, but I'm pretty sure the reason we only require copyright
> assignment for largish changes is that the general legal consensus is
> that it happens automatically for small changes. (In the same way that
> if you proofread someone's novel for them, you don't get to claim
> copyright on the sentences where you fix spelling errors.)
> > The real question is whether or not copyright assignment allows for
> > retroactive license changes.
> The only thing that would allow us to retroactively change the license
> would be a time machine.
> -- Dan
> _______________________________________________
> desktop-devel-list mailing list
> desktop-devel-list gnome org

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]