From: Steven Johnson <sjohnson@sakuraindustries.com>
To: insight@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Insight and Licencing of TCL/TK Code
Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 13:18:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4289D3D0.8090306@sakuraindustries.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <42896711.8070400@sakuraindustries.com>
This is a follow on from "The current status of insight'. It occurs to
me that there is actually a legal problem with the TCL/TK Sources of
insight not being assigned to the FSF.
It would seem to me (as i stare at the code, and without checking CVS at
all). That there must, over the life of insight, have been a number of
patches made to the TCL/TK code, from people that are not employees of
Redhat or Cygnus. Now those people, if they are contributing anything
of substance will probably have completed assignments with the FSF (like
i did ages ago). But they would not have assigned their changes to
redhat. So now, there are files, that contain Redhat copyright, that
have been modified, and those modifications are presumably assigned to
the FSF, but certainly Redhat can not claim copyright over them. Yet
the files as they stand, claim copyright over the entire contents,
including the contributed parts, that have not been assigned to Redhat.
Isnt this a problem?
Certainly if I were to submit TCL/TK code (which the way im going, im
about to), i would not be assigning it's copyright to Redhat.
How is this dealt with? is that really the cruxt of the problem?
If so, it would seem like there is almost an obligation to "officialy"
effect the assignment, so that this work of others is properly
copyrighted, as intended by the various contributors? Even checking CVS
wouldnt categorically decide the issue of who owns each patch, as the
patch may have been applied by an employee of Redhat, but may very well
of been submitted by an external party. The only way to unscramble the
Egg as it were would be to do a trawl of every maintainers email, to
find the ultimate source of each patch. A task that is infeasible.
Steven Johnson
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-05-16 13:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-05-14 22:13 Current Status of Insight Paul Schlie
2005-05-16 5:35 ` Steven Johnson
2005-05-16 13:18 ` Steven Johnson [this message]
2005-05-16 13:31 ` Insight and Licencing of TCL/TK Code Duane Ellis
2005-05-16 13:39 ` Jon Beniston
2005-05-16 14:15 ` Steven Johnson
2005-05-16 16:12 ` Christopher Faylor
2005-05-17 19:33 ` Current Status of Insight Fernando Nasser
2005-05-16 16:10 ` Christopher Faylor
2005-05-16 17:18 ` Paul Schlie
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4289D3D0.8090306@sakuraindustries.com \
--to=sjohnson@sakuraindustries.com \
--cc=insight@sources.redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).