Ondrej Martinek wrote: > Jiri Kuthan wrote: >> Ondrej Martinek wrote: >>> SER is apparently licensed under GPL (see COPYING file and the topmost >>> comments in the most source files). By the "viral" nature of GPL, >>> TekCore SER is GPL-licensed too and since we do not publish all >>> (...well any) of its source code, we are using it illegally in >>> Tekelec. That's the fact. Please, don't mention it in front of >>> Tekelec lawyers. ;)\ >> However, as we are copyright owners we have the freedom to choose any >> license of our preference. > > Well, then how does a CVS contributor transfer his copyright to us? It > cannot be "automatic" and we need a written and signed agreement with > each one which is compliant with his local jurisdiction. Under Czech > law, it's the only way how an author can pass his copyright to someone else. > > BTW, Jiri, I'm far from challenging you in this field. Rather, I'd like > to compare views and learn from arguments.
Hi Ondrej, no problem at all. In this particular case, the juridisction is mostly German (by virtue of producing most of the core historically there under iptelorg GmbH), even though some parts of it could be formally assigned to Tekelec Inc. (as result of work-for-hire type of agreements, which are being implemented for taxation reasons to provide funds for Tekelec CZ). With the pieces in question, we do have agreements in place indeed for their GPL parts. I don't think that's needed for BSD contributions. -jiri > >>> What we need - if we want to be on the safe side - is fully BSD-licensed >>> SER and all the contributors to agree with this. The old code obviously >>> cannot be re-licensed without their agreement or some kind of settlement. >> I don't consider it likely we would be relicensing our existing GPL >> stuff under >> BSD terms. Extensions to it don't appear to be problematic under BSD. >> >>> Andrei: I quite sure you can't add new stuff under BSD (or any other >>> license) to GPL-ed original without the result not ending up as GPL. >> IANAL, but what makes you believe so? > > By adding new stuff, modifying the original you create a derivative > work. In example, see > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License, section "The > GPL in court" states: > > "The GPL is clear in requiring that all derivative works of code > under the GPL must themselves be under the GPL." > > --ondra > >> -jiri >> >>> Yours self-educated amateur OSS lawyer, >>> --ondra >>> >>> Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul wrote: >>>> On Nov 04, 2008 at 09:49, Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> wrote: >>>> [...] >>>> >>>>> What all that would mean to us is that we would have to announce and >>>>> discuss api changes (and other big changes stuff) to core or tm >>>>> prior to commiting them. We would also have to use BSD for core & tm. >>>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >>>> clarification: for new code going >>>> to core & tm (we won't change >>>> licensing for existing stuff) >>>> [...] >>>> >>>> >>>> Andrei >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> All mailing list >>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/all > _______________________________________________ > Serdev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serdev > _______________________________________________ Serdev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serdev
