Nadeem Vawda wrote:
I was wondering what the policy is regarding copyright notices and license
boilerplate text at the top of source files.
I am currently rewriting the bz2 module (see
http://bugs.python.org/issue5863),
splitting the existing Modules/bz2module.c into Modules/_bz2module.c
On Mon, 21 Mar 2011 13:20:59 +0100
M.-A. Lemburg m...@egenix.com wrote:
Nadeem Vawda wrote:
I was wondering what the policy is regarding copyright notices and license
boilerplate text at the top of source files.
I am currently rewriting the bz2 module (see
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 2:20 PM, M.-A. Lemburg m...@egenix.com wrote:
Nadeem Vawda wrote:
[snip]
Since you'll be adding new IP to Python, the new code you write should
contain your copyright and the standard PSF contributor agreement
notice, e.g.
(c) Copyright 2011 by Nadeem Vawda.
I was wondering what the policy is regarding copyright notices and license
boilerplate text at the top of source files.
I am currently rewriting the bz2 module (see http://bugs.python.org/issue5863),
splitting the existing Modules/bz2module.c into Modules/_bz2module.c and
Lib/bz2.py.
Are new
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 11:01 PM, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
Guido van Rossum wrote:
2009/1/20 Raymond Hettinger pyt...@rcn.com:
I'm at a loss of why the notice needs to be there at all.
There's a difference between contributing a whole file and
contributing a patch. Patches do
On 2009-01-20 00:56, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
Why does numbers.py say:
# Copyright 2007 Google, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
# Licensed to PSF under a Contributor Agreement.
Because that's where that file originated, I guess. This is part
of what you have to do for things that are
M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
[snip...]
Does the copyright concept even apply to an
abstract base class (I thought APIs were not
subject to copyright, just like database layouts
and language definitions)?
It applies to the written program text. You are probably
thinking about other IP rights
On 2009-01-20 11:02, Michael Foord wrote:
M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
[snip...]
Does the copyright concept even apply to an
abstract base class (I thought APIs were not
subject to copyright, just like database layouts
and language definitions)?
It applies to the written program text. You
M.-A. Lemburg writes:
On 2009-01-20 11:02, Michael Foord wrote:
Mere collections of facts are not copyrightable as they are not
creative (the basis of copyright)
That's incorrect in the U.S.; what is copyrightable is an *original
work of expression fixed in some medium*. Original is
Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
M.-A. Lemburg writes:
On 2009-01-20 11:02, Michael Foord wrote:
Mere collections of facts are not copyrightable as they are not
creative (the basis of copyright)
That's incorrect in the U.S.; what is copyrightable is an *original
work of expression fixed in
M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
On 2009-01-20 00:56, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
Why does numbers.py say:
# Copyright 2007 Google, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
# Licensed to PSF under a Contributor Agreement.
Because that's where that file originated, I guess. This is part
of what you have to do for
On 2009-01-20 16:54, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
M.-A. Lemburg writes:
On 2009-01-20 11:02, Michael Foord wrote:
Mere collections of facts are not copyrightable as they are not
creative (the basis of copyright)
That's incorrect in the U.S.; what is copyrightable is an *original
[Terry Reedy]
Bottom line to me. The current notion of copyright does not work too
well with evolving, loosely collective works (which eventually become
'folklore').
I'm at a loss of why the notice needs to be there at all. AFAICT, we've
had tons of contributions from googlers and only one
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 5:36 PM, Raymond Hettinger pyt...@rcn.com wrote:
[Terry Reedy]
Bottom line to me. The current notion of copyright does not work too well
with evolving, loosely collective works (which eventually become
'folklore').
I'm at a loss of why the notice needs to be there
2009/1/20 Raymond Hettinger pyt...@rcn.com:
I'm at a loss of why the notice needs to be there at all.
There's a difference between contributing a whole file and
contributing a patch. Patches do not require copyright notices. Whole
files do. This is not affected by later edits to the file.
[Raymond Hettinger]
I'm at a loss of why the notice needs to be there at all.
[GvR]
There's a difference between contributing a whole file and
contributing a patch. Patches do not require copyright notices. Whole
files do. This is not affected by later edits to the file.
That makes sense.
I would be all for cleaning up, if the lawyers agree, but I've spent
enough time talking to lawyers for the rest of my life. You know where
to reach Van Lindberg.
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 5:20 PM, Raymond Hettinger pyt...@rcn.com wrote:
[Raymond Hettinger]
I'm at a loss of why the notice needs
Guido van Rossum wrote:
2009/1/20 Raymond Hettinger pyt...@rcn.com:
I'm at a loss of why the notice needs to be there at all.
There's a difference between contributing a whole file and
contributing a patch. Patches do not require copyright notices. Whole
files do. This is not affected by
Why does numbers.py say:
# Copyright 2007 Google, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
# Licensed to PSF under a Contributor Agreement.
Weren't there multiple contributors including non-google people?
Does Google want to be associated with code that
was submitted with no tests?
Do we want this
Raymond Hettinger writes:
Does the copyright concept even apply to an abstract base class (I
thought APIs were not subject to copyright, just like database
layouts and language definitions)?
Yes, it does, although a public API per se is not subject to
copyright, because there's only one
20 matches
Mail list logo
