On Wed, 20 May 2015, David Lamparter wrote:
reason - their choice to put work into something is completely
independent.
Let's be clear about something:
The nub of the issue here is that at least some lawyers say (AIUI) that
when you write code that heavily depends on someone else's code, then you
no longer exclusively own that code. The other people also are copyright
holders in the code you wrote.
Applied to quagga-babeld, the issue is that at least some lawyers have
given advice that implies that at least portions of it likely do not
belong exclusively to Juliusz and Matthieu - other Quagga copyright
holders *also* "own" it.
If that is the case, then they do NOT have the freedom to choose their
licence completely independently.
I am not a lawyer, I don't know what's right, I can only go by what every
lawyer I've had advice from on Quagga - 3 different sets of lawyers - have
advised to this effect (and the first time, from the corporate counsel, it
really wasn't what I wanted to hear).
regards,
--
Paul Jakma p...@jakma.org @pjakma Key ID: 64A2FF6A
Fortune:
Most Texans think Hanukkah is some sort of duck call.
-- Richard Lewis
_______________________________________________
Quagga-dev mailing list
Quagga-dev@lists.quagga.net
https://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-dev
