List Archive: gentoo-nfp
Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date.
provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.c.f. bug 424647
On Wed, 2009-02-18 at 22:26 +0200, Petteri Räty wrote:
> Ned Ludd wrote:
> > On Wed, 2009-02-18 at 13:10 +0200, Petteri Räty wrote:
> >> I have a mostly user written ebuild in which he has put his copyright to
> >> the header instead of the standard one so repoman is not happy about it.
> >> What is the model we should follow these days? Since developers haven't
> >> been doing copyright assignment for a while there's so much of the tree
> >> that isn't actually under Gentoo Foundation copyright as far as I
> >> understand it so should we just allow adding individual developers to
> >> the headers along the Foundation? I will be adding a question about this
> >> to the quizzes when we get some decision done so that new developers get
> >> educated on this (probably also need to have this documented somewhere
> >> on your web pages).
> > This topic came up years ago. End solution was that ebuilds that go into
> > the tree need to be assigned to the foundation. Reason for this is that
> > if we ever have to go to court to protect any IP the author wont have to
> > go to the courts with us to co-defend that IP.
> Ok so where can I point him for instructions on what papers to fill in
> order to assign copyright or is just the header enough?
I think the header is simply enough.
Btw when this same topic was a hot item before it was when "amir" and
drobbins were around. infact that sorta was the reason drobbins wanted
to collect copyright assignments from devs.
But if we do go with dual copyrighted materiel. Then he could probably
add it on line #4 to avoid the repoman checks etc..
Ned Ludd <firstname.lastname@example.org>