Phil Steitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 03/06/2005 08:39:27 AM:
> Below is Larry's response as well, forwarded with permission. I think
> the concepts of "original work" and "derivative work" are being strained
> here. As I said above, I don't claim to understand any of this, but
> would very much like to understand enough to make sure that we are doing
> all -- and only -- the right things in maintaining our code bases. Here
> is how the process "normally" works @apache. Others can correct me if I
> am generalizing incorrectly based on the projects that I have worked on:
>
Phil,
I think that Larry and I would agree that the copyright statute was not written with organizations like Apache in mind. In was generally expected at the time that there would be one or at most a few "authors" of a single work. If it was a work developed by many people, it was normally in the context of a company where the authors were employees, and the law automatically assigned ownership of the work to the company.
So, we are trying to apply old rules to volunteer organizations where the original authors retain their copyrights. It is not a perfect fit.
What Larry is suggesting more closely complies with the letter of the statutes. However, it does not satisfy Apache's needs, at least as I understand them, as well as the current policy, which certainly complies with the spirit. The question is what is the effect of Apache's policy?
I do not think that Larry is suggesting that the current Apache copyright notice will cause the files to lose their copyright. Then, if someone were to challenge the Apache notice as misleading, what would be the effect? As I read the statute, the actual owner of the code would be prohibited from protesting the license granted by Apache. But, then again, everyone contributing to Apache wants Apache to grant those licenses, so I'm not sure what the downside is?
Jeff
Staff Counsel, IBM Corporation (914)766-1757 (tie)8-826 (fax) -8160
(notes) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (internet) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(web) http://www.beff.net/
- [Fwd: Re: Copyright text, and javadoc license] Phil Steitz
- Re: [Fwd: Re: Copyright text, and javadoc license] Jeffrey Thompson
- Re: [Fwd: Re: Copyright text, and javadoc licens... Phil Steitz
- Jeffrey Thompson
