Re: [PATCH] libstdc++: Update documentation about copyright and GPL notices in tests

[Koning, Paul via Gcc-patches]

> On Apr 28, 2022, at 8:37 AM, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc-patches 
> <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> 
> I intend to commit this patch soon. This isn't changing the policy, just
> adjusting the docs to match the current policy.
> 
> I'm open to suggestions for better ways to phrase the second sentence,
> clarifying that our tests generally have nothing novel or "authored".
> 
> -- >8 --
> 
> There is no need to require FSF copyright for tests that are just
> "self-evident" ways to check the API and behaviour of the library.
> This is consistent with tests for the compiler, which do not have
> copyright and licence notices either.

So is the theory that "self-evident" documents are in the public domain for 
that reason?  Or is the policy that for such file it is fine for the copyright 
to be held by the author (which is the default when no assignment is made)?  
And a similar question applies to the license aspect also.

I think I understand the intent, and that seems to make sense, but I'm 
wondering if it has been verified by the appropriate FSF IP lawyers.

        paul