Ok. got it. go ahead and include those unwanted changes :)
And rollback Constants_ja_JP.properties.

Thanks for feeding me,
Yusuke - the troll.

On Sep 1, 2010, at 8:02 PM, Michael Neale wrote:

> Wrong again: 
> 
>    5. Submission of Contributions. Unless You explicitly state otherwise,
>       any Contribution intentionally submitted for inclusion in the Work
>       by You to the Licensor shall be under the terms and conditions of
>       this License, without any additional terms or conditions.
>       Notwithstanding the above, nothing herein shall supersede or modify
>       the terms of any separate license agreement you may have executed
>       with Licensor regarding such Contributions.
> 
> 
> 
> On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 8:38 PM, Yusuke Yamamoto <[email protected]> wrote:
> You want to include my works in the future release as derivative works, right?
> I understood. Please go ahead and keep redistributing the changes in *.java - 
> which is declared to be released under the ASL.
> 
> But, please remove the change in 
> drools-guvnor/src/main/java/org/drools/guvnor/client/messages/Constants_ja_JP.properties
>  from me.
> It's got no license declaration in the file. So I guess I have choice to 
> decide the license of my work. And I decide not to deliver my changes under 
> the ASL.
> Please understand that it is not permissible for me that Red Hat takes 
> advantage of my work.
> It may sound unconstructive. Yes, it is unconstructive. But this is what my 
> doctor is suggesting.
> Things need to get straighten.
> 
> Cheers,
> Yusuke - the troll.
> 
> On Sep 1, 2010, at 7:08 PM, Mark Proctor wrote:
> 
>> On 01/09/2010 11:01, Yusuke Yamamoto wrote:
>>> Now I'm not requesting to change the license retroactively.
>>> It's okay to keep including my work in the released versions.
>>> As the copyright holder, and the originator of the work, I'm just declaring 
>>> that my work will no longer licensed under the ASL in the future versions.
>>> AFAIK, the copyright holder can change the license in the future release.
>>> Like oracle changed the license of WebLogic Server from BEA's license to 
>>> OTN license.
>> That is not how it works, end of discussion.
>> 
>> Mark
>>> 
>>>> Any further discussions should take place between legally qualified people.
>>> Please have Richard respond to me faithfully. Otherwise I need to request 
>>> here.
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Yusuke
>>> 
>>> On Sep 1, 2010, at 6:40 PM, Mark Proctor wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On 01/09/2010 10:16, Yusuke Yamamoto wrote:
>>>>>> No that is not the way that OSS licensing works. You as the copyright 
>>>>>> holder may release future versions of code you hold the copyright for 
>>>>>> under different licenses. You cannot retro-actively change the license 
>>>>>> of something.
>>>>> Yeah, you're right on that part.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Red Hat shouldn't be the copyright holder since it's done by my spare 
>>>>> time. There's no term in the employment agreement that enables Red Hat to 
>>>>> grab copyright ownership of employee's work done by unpaid hours.
>>>>> You are confusing copyright, go seek legal council - maybe Richard?
>>>>> 
>>>>> And as the copyright holder, I do not wish to release my work under the 
>>>>> ASL in the future.
>>>>> So please remove them from the trunk and do not include in the future 
>>>>> versions.
>>>> Either you are incredibly stupid, or just playing dumb to annoy everyone 
>>>> and waste people's time. I don't think myself or others could have been 
>>>> any clearer. You cannot retroactive unlicense something. That code which 
>>>> you have contributed is under the terms of the ASL, FOREVER, you cannot 
>>>> change that. Under the terms of the ASL we can modify it and distribute 
>>>> and make derivitives from it in further versions FOREVER.
>>>> 
>>>> I have made that clear, your code will not be removed, this matter is 
>>>> closed and you will achieve nothing more in discussing this further here. 
>>>> Any further discussions should take place between legally qualified people.
>>>> 
>>>> Now grow up and stop embarassing yourself.
>>>> 
>>>> Mark
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Yusuke
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Sep 1, 2010, at 4:22 PM, Mark Proctor wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 01/09/2010 02:50, 山本 裕介 wrote:
>>>>>>>> At the time of your contributions to Drools and other projects you 
>>>>>>>> were a Red Hat employee. The Red Hat legal department has determined 
>>>>>>>> that it has the right to copy, modify and distribute your 
>>>>>>>> contributions under the Apache License version 2.0 and considers this 
>>>>>>>> matter closed. 
>>>>>>> Richard didn't explain that. 
>>>>>>> I didn't use Red Hat time to fix those bugs, translate message 
>>>>>>> resources. I believe that "I am/was a Red Hat employee" doesn't matter. 
>>>>>>> I'm not paid for the task.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> "At the time the code was contributed in good faith under the Apache 
>>>>>>> license, you cannot then decide at a later date to change your mind."
>>>>>>> My understanding is that people just do not want to undone their 
>>>>>>> contributions usually. That is how OSS works.
>>>>>>> Technically the copyright holder of translated message resources, 
>>>>>>> program codes is the originator.
>>>>>>> I agreed to distribute my work under the ASL, but I didn't tell that I 
>>>>>>> willingly give away the copyright to the project.
>>>>>>> Anybody who originates their work (i.e. the copyright holder) should be 
>>>>>>> able to decide the license at a later date.
>>>>>> No that is not the way that OSS licensing works. You as the copyright 
>>>>>> holder may release future versions of code you hold the copyright for 
>>>>>> under different licenses. You cannot retro-actively change the license 
>>>>>> of something.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Imagine I release a project under ASL, I get a million users. I then 
>>>>>> change my mind and revoke that and tell those million users, you can't 
>>>>>> use that under OSS anymore as i've changed my mind, if you want to use 
>>>>>> it pay me 10 billion dollars. 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> You are confusing copyright and licensing, go seek legal council.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Mark
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Richard, any comment?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Sep 1, 2010, at 8:27 AM, Michael Neale wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> So is the reason that there is a dispute over another copyright 
>>>>>>>> holder? (ie these changes were copied in violation of that copyright 
>>>>>>>> in the first place) - or a case of changing-minds about rights to the 
>>>>>>>> commits of the original work? (if the latter then close the issue - 
>>>>>>>> nothing can or should be done - as it is a licencing issue then, not a 
>>>>>>>> copyright issue, and as Mark says the licence doesn't permit that 
>>>>>>>> revoking). 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 7:56 AM, Mark Proctor <[email protected]> 
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Yusuke,
>>>>>>>> At the time of your contributions to Drools and other projects you 
>>>>>>>> were a Red Hat employee. The Red Hat legal department has determined 
>>>>>>>> that it has the right to copy, modify and distribute your 
>>>>>>>> contributions under the Apache License version 2.0 and considers this 
>>>>>>>> matter closed. If you have any further need to discuss this please do 
>>>>>>>> so with Red Hat legal, - you have their contact details.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Even if you were not a Red Hat employee, which you were at the time, 
>>>>>>>> you cannot undo an OSS code contribution, that is not how OSS 
>>>>>>>> licensing works. At the time the code was contributed in good faith 
>>>>>>>> under the Apache license, you cannot then decide at a later date to 
>>>>>>>> change your mind. The OSS licenses, be it ASL or LGPL or GPL, are 
>>>>>>>> designed specifically to provide certainty in that area. Without this 
>>>>>>>> level of certainty end user OSS adoption would be a minefield as every 
>>>>>>>> time developers fall out, which happens often, one could demand all 
>>>>>>>> their code be removed and this would impact everyone who has invested 
>>>>>>>> time installing that software in production systems.
>>>>>>>> Mark
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On 31/08/2010 17:41, 山本 裕介 wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I have consulted RH legal dept. only to get no meaningful response.
>>>>>>>>> I guess Edson is the one who commit most of these files.
>>>>>>>>> The how and why they need to be uncommitted is attached to the Jira 
>>>>>>>>> issue.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>> Yusuke
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Sep 1, 2010, at 1:34 AM, Mauricio Salatino wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Hi Yusuke, good question. I'm not sure where is the right place, but 
>>>>>>>>>> you are only asking to rollback your changes right?
>>>>>>>>>> who commit all your contributions to the jboss repo?
>>>>>>>>>> I also saw that you mention: "For several reasons, I decided to 
>>>>>>>>>> withdraw those contributions introduced from my spare time. "
>>>>>>>>>> can you mention those reasons? so we, as community can learn why you 
>>>>>>>>>> want to remove your contributions. I'm just curious.
>>>>>>>>>> Greetings.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 12:50 PM, 山本 裕介 <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Where is the appropriate forum for copyright issues?
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On Sep 1, 2010, at 12:45 AM, Greg Barton wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> > This is not the appropriate forum for copyrighgt issues.
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > GreG
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > On Aug 31, 2010, at 9:40, 山本 裕介 <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Hi,
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > There's a copyright violation issue on Drools 5.1 release.
>>>>>>>>>> > Please remove the changes listed in the following issue.
>>>>>>>>>> > https://jira.jboss.org/browse/JBRULES-2660
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>> > Yusuke
>>>>>>>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> > rules-users mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> > [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> > rules-users mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> > [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> rules-users mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>>>>>  - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com  
>>>>>>>>>>  - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
>>>>>>>>>>  - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>>  - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> rules-users mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> rules-users mailing list
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> rules-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>>> Michael D Neale
>>>>>>>> home: www.michaelneale.net
>>>>>>>> blog: michaelneale.blogspot.com
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> rules-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> rules-dev mailing list
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> rules-dev mailing list
>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> rules-dev mailing list
>>>>> 
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> rules-dev mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> rules-dev mailing list
>>> 
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> rules-dev mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> rules-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Michael D Neale
> home: www.michaelneale.net
> blog: michaelneale.blogspot.com
> _______________________________________________
> rules-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev


_______________________________________________
rules-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev

Reply via email to