+1 for at least having this discussed out in the open. The issue of copyright did tickle my mind when I saw the headers during my dev quiz.
On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 4:21 PM, Rich Freeman <ri...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 7:10 PM, Matt Turner <matts...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 4:07 PM, Rich Freeman <ri...@gentoo.org> wrote: > >> On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 6:34 PM, Matt Turner <matts...@gentoo.org> > wrote: > >>> In order to contribute to GNU projects, one must sign a copyright > >>> assignment statement. > >>> > >>> Gentoo doesn't have anything similar as far as I'm aware, which makes > >>> me question the legitimacy of "Gentoo Foundation" copyrights. > >>> > >>> What is the story? > >>> > >> > >> The story of what? > >> > >> Are you asking whether they're legally binding? You'd have to sue > >> somebody to find out, because as far as I'm aware the matter is > >> untested in court. I think you could make an argument that > >> voluntarily placing that header on your work is an assignment of > >> copyright. You could also argue otherwise. A court would decide who > >> wins. > > > > I'm asking whether we're just cargo-culting it along, or if we have > > (had) some kind of system in place to assign copyright. I think Ciaran > > answered: we used to but not anymore. > > > > As I said, you could debate whether the present system already assigns > copyright. I don't think it is ideal. It certainly isn't backed by > any court decisions that I'm aware of. That doesn't necessarily mean > that it wouldn't be upheld if it did go to court. There is really no > way to be certain without trying it. > > But, it is better to rely upon methods that are already proven in > court over ones that have yet to be proven. I'm not disputing that. > > -- > Rich > >
