From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17505 invoked by alias); 4 Apr 2008 16:09:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 17493 invoked by uid 22791); 4 Apr 2008 16:09:46 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.logix-tt.com (HELO mail.logix-tt.com) (212.211.145.186) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 04 Apr 2008 16:09:17 +0000 Received: from kingfisher.intern.logix-tt.com (84-72-190-27.dclient.hispeed.ch [84.72.190.27]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.logix-tt.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E5C26526B; Fri, 4 Apr 2008 18:10:53 +0200 (CEST) Received: from kingfisher.sec.intern.logix-tt.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by kingfisher.intern.logix-tt.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15F601320F4; Fri, 4 Apr 2008 18:09:14 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2008 16:13:00 -0000 From: Markus Schaber To: ecos-discuss@ecos.sourceware.org Message-ID: <20080404180913.785f477c@kingfisher.sec.intern.logix-tt.com> In-Reply-To: <20080404180557.66980368@kingfisher.sec.intern.logix-tt.com> References: <20080403112347.68e481c9@kingfisher.sec.intern.logix-tt.com> <200804030937.m339bj00013603@mail168c2.megamailservers.com> <200804032050.20913.neundorf@kde.org> <200804032228.m33MSkCg027848@mail168c2.megamailservers.com> <20080404104457.35553e0a@kingfisher.sec.intern.logix-tt.com> <200804040912.m349CrYq028389@mail176c2.megamailservers.com> <20080404114231.7efcf59a@kingfisher.sec.intern.logix-tt.com> <200804041000.m34A0Fto023055@mail175c2.megamailservers.com> <47F6470F.2080707@ecoscentric.com> <20080404180557.66980368@kingfisher.sec.intern.logix-tt.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.3.1 (GTK+ 2.12.9; i486-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact ecos-discuss-help@ecos.sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: ecos-discuss-owner@ecos.sourceware.org Subject: Re: [ECOS] Are copyright assignments detrimental to eCos? X-SW-Source: 2008-04/txt/msg00090.txt.bz2 Hi, Markus, Markus Schaber wrote: > That does not hold true in case of FSF-Style copright assignments. I > don't know the eCos assignment clauses exactly, I just was told that the eCos copyright assignment is not to RedHat or eCosCentric, but to the FSF. That falsifies my statements about the RedHat sales droids, I presume, although there are still the "for other licenses, contact RedHat" statements scattered over the web and source. Regards, Markus -- Markus Schaber | Logical Tracking&Tracing International AG Dipl. Inf. | Software Development GIS Fight against software patents in Europe! www.ffii.org www.nosoftwarepatents.org -- Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss