From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28620 invoked by alias); 20 Oct 2005 22:06:17 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cygwin-licensing-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-licensing-owner@cygwin.com Received: (qmail 17886 invoked by uid 22791); 20 Oct 2005 21:45:26 -0000 Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 22:06:00 -0000 From: =?ISO-8859-2?Q?=C9rsek_L=E1szl=F3?= To: cygwin-licensing@cygwin.com Subject: "Unusual" contribution licensing problems Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-SW-Source: 2005-q4/txt/msg00000.txt.bz2 Valued Cygwin Team, after grepping the cygwin mailing list and my up-to-date cygwin installation for "nftw" and "fts_open", I thought that it could make sense (and fun) to implement nftw(). It works for me, so I'd like to give it to cygwin. Of course your acceptance depends on at least two factors: licensing and technical merit. I'd like to ask about licensing first because if it's legally impossible for me to contribute this code to cygwin, I'm not interested in its further development (I mean that of my code, not of cygwin). And your answers could be of value for others as well, even if my code proves naive or if nftw() is already in cygwin and it's just me who didn't look hard enough. (In the latter case, I apologize for the noise.) I've read http://gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html and http://cygwin.com/assign.txt some time ago. Let me list some facts and guesses: 1 "Not very interesing" 1.1 I developed the code on my home machine, GNU/Linux installation, in my free time, alone. The cygwin installation I used for testing is on a laptop owned by my employer. (I used the laptop for this purpose only in my free time at home, alone. Such use of the laptop is not prohibited.) 1.2 I'm employed as a developer. I think I can get a written disclaimer from my employer for the code. 1.3 As an alumnus of a university, I still have (legal) accounts on some servers of the university. I used those accounts to compile and test my code (besides the cygwin installation mentioned above, of course). I don't know whether I need some written permission from the university. 1.4 I didn't look at other nftw() sources. However, I did write a small test program and (legally) observed the behavior of other nftw() (and ftw()) implementations. I also strace'd some of the executables. 1.5 As specification, I used the SUSv[123] of The Open Group (which I think I'm entitled to download for reading on my own monitor) and various info and man pages. 2 "More interesing" 2.1 I want to give this code (as a gift) to a company which develops proprietary software _after_ (if at all) cygwin has accepted my contribution. I wouldn't mind if they sold a (-n improved) version of my code without even mentioning my name. (I don't intend to make money with this code myself.) I'd simply like to have nftw() functionality in that libc, even if they wouldn't allow me to publicly brag about my code in their libc (if that nftw() was my code at all). I didn't contact them yet; cygwin and free availability comes first. 2.2 That's why I don't think about assigning copyright to anybody but placing my nftw() code into the public domain. 3 "Problematic" 3.1 In my country, Hungary (member of the EU since May 1, 2004, if that matters), copyright is known and regulated. Copyright can be divided into two groups of "subrights": the one of "financial" or proprietary rights, and the one of personal rights. 3.2 In my country, everything one creates becomes automatically copyrighted by him/her, and it can _not_ be placed into the public domain at once. 3.3 One can trade or give away its proprietary copyright "subrights" like any other property. 3.4 One can _not_ alienate one's own personal copyright "subrights". 3.5 Copyright expires after 70 years after creation (or first known publication, if creation time is unknown). 3.5 I might try to sign a copyright assignment contract, but through that I would perhaps break the law; or the contract to sign would be void in Hungary right from conception. This depends on whether the contract in question assigns proprietary or personal rights. 3.6 An example. Formally, the GPL is an invalid contract, AFAIK, for Hungarian authors. (Possible) reasons: (i) it is only available in electronic form (when slapped into a package under the name COPYING), (ii) it is not a contract between concrete parties, (iii) it tries to alienate non-alienateable rights, (iv) it tries to do so in an irrevokable way. 3.7 Since employed software developers are generally compensated for their employment work with their salary and then their work fully belongs (whatever that means) to their employers, it should be possible to "get rid" of every relevant copyright "subright". Maybe I should "sell" this code to somebody for 1 cent who promises to place it into the public domain in some country where that's possible. (Maybe I should have done that myself through some fake nick and/or IP address, but what I _don't_ want to lose if my code qualifies is a "thanks" e-mail with my name inside.) 3.8 IANALATEIHSMBB. IHNTTTTAL. IHNMTHAL. (OK, for sake of unambiguousness: I Am Not A Lawyer, Therefore Everything I Have Said May Be Bogus. I Have No Time To Talk To A Lawyer. I Have No Money To Hire A Lawyer.) What should I do? Thank you, and I'm sorry for the long post. Laszlo Ersek