> > Well, I think that many would argue that such a work is a collective, > > rather than a joint work. In fact, it seems to me that most of the > > large collaborative communities are running under that assumption. > > A collective work is defined as "a work, such as a periodical issue, anthology, or > encyclopedia, in which a number of contributions, constituting separate and > independent works in themselves, are assembled into a collective whole." Now > maybe you could claim that an individual file constitutes a separate and > independent work. But a patch? > I doubt it.
So you are asserting that by getting a single patch accepted into the Linux kernel that I can, under US copyright law, re-license the entire work? As long as I share any proceeds equally with all other copyright holders of course. _______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
