On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 2:41 PM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 2:36 PM, Noah Slater <nsla...@tumbolia.org> wrote: >> Saying that configuration files, in all cases, are not copywritable because >> that are, on the whole, not as complex as code is like saying that blog >> posts, in all cases, are not copywritable because they are, on the whole, >> not as complex as books. >> >> The law is much more nuanced than that. There is no way we can say, up >> front, whether a configuration file is protected by copywrite or not. The >> unwillingness to commit to anything on legal-discuss is an indication of >> this. (It was made explicit that with a vague question, there will only be >> vague answers.) >> >> It might be better to actually document what we have, and then present that >> to legal discuss and take it from there. >> >> Let's get concrete. >> >> We should put together a list of each config file path, along with >> information such as: >> >> * Size of file >> * Complexity (key/value, code snippets, what?) >> * Copyright notice or license header? >> * License of project it (may) have been taken from >> * Origin (Citrix, upstream project, unknown?) >> >> Once we have a complete picture, I think we can talk about how to proceed. >> >> (And hopefully propose a guideline for future config files.) >> >> I certainly do not think we are in a position to write of an entire >> category of data as being uncopywritable. >> >> I am happy to run this to pursue this with legal too, but I think we need a >> better view of what we're dealing with. >> >> Thoughts? >> > > > Alright, I'll start working on compiling this. > > --David >
David, Do you want to divide and conquer on this task? I'd be happy to help. -chip
