Alfred M. Szmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Any official GNU docs or position on this subject?
Copyrights have to be tracked. Where the project is important,
[...]
This is also true for non-important projects.
Create editing is really a pastime of yours. You cut away the second
John Hasler wrote:
[...]
There is no need to round them all up. Each has a copyright in the work
and can prosecute infringement independently of all the others. Thus IBM
is prosecuting its claims that SCO is infringing its copyrights
Uncle Husler, uncle Husler. IBM asserted two GPL
Please refrain from posting adhominem attacks to this list. We
already have one person doing such things, including creative ASCII
art.
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Alfred M. Szmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Please refrain from posting adhominem attacks to this list. We
already have one person doing such things, including creative ASCII
art.
It is not an adhominem attack if I complain about you repeatedly
mangling postings of mine in misleading manners,
If you're running a free software project, and a contributor posts a
few lines of code, or a patch, to the public mailing list (implicitly
expecting you to feel free to incorporate the posted code into the
project), it would seem reasonable for a project copyright holder (one
who's doing the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If you're running a free software project, and a contributor posts a
few lines of code, or a patch, to the public mailing list
(implicitly expecting you to feel free to incorporate the posted
code into the project), it would seem reasonable for a project
copyright
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Kastrup wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I assume that all committers on a given project put their names
in the license header of the files that they modify.
Rarely.
Hm. Whoops. I'd forgotten about copyright assignment for GNU
projects. For other
jmg3000 writes:
Actually, where a large number of folks all have their own copyrights for
a given project, I don't see how that could work. It's not like you could
conceivably round them all up and get them to show up in court if they
actually had to legally defend their collective licensing
Any official GNU docs or position on this subject?
Copyrights have to be tracked. Where the project is important,
[...]
This is also true for non-important projects.
To the OP, check the GNU Maintainer guidelines and the GNU Coding
Standards. That is what GNU projects (and some
David Kastrup wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If you're running a free software project, and a contributor posts a
few lines of code, or a patch, to the public mailing list
(implicitly expecting you to feel free to incorporate the posted
code into the project), it would seem reasonable
Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
[snip]
To the OP, check the GNU Maintainer guidelines and the GNU Coding
Standards. That is what GNU projects (and some non-GNU projects)
follow.
Ah. That's what I was looking for. :)
Here we are: http://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/ . Section 4.2 mentions
around 15
11 matches
Mail list logo
