On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 05:33:46PM +0100, Arnt Karlsen wrote: > On Tue, 9 Dec 2003 13:58:15 +0000, > Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > On Mon, Dec 08, 2003 at 04:58:26PM -0800, Karsten M. Self wrote: > > > On a more practical note: copyright would pass to the estate and > > > heirs. It's possible (not necessarially easy) to get assignments in > > > this case. > > > > Yeah. The thought has occurred to me, but it seems rather tasteless to > > go and ask. In practice my assessment is that it's vanishingly > > unlikely to become an actual problem (and if it does, I'll just remove > > all copyrightable pieces of code he wrote), so again I've gone for the > > easy road. > > ..I disagree: It _is_ appropriate to approach the heirs and ask, > informing them of the 2 alternatives, removal of his code (just > like we're gonna do with any SCO code), and the heirs giving > their permission to let the dead man's code work survive under > the GPL and copyright law. Chances are very good they will > consider what he would have wanted them to do. > > .._not_ asking, I find _less_ appropriate, because chances are, > the heirs may feel we take liberties with _their_ copyright.
Eh? The code is GPL. The person in question was perfectly aware of this and licensed his code the same way. *No* liberties are being taken! The discussion with Karsten is about the problem of getting copyright assignments to the FSF for the purpose of making it a GNU project, which is purely hypothetical; it's something I have no intention of actually doing. Please read the thread a little more carefully. Cheers, -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
