| 1 |
>>>>> On Mon, 22 Sep 2014, W Trevor King wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> There's no Signed-off-by on the commits adding the DCO to the Linux |
| 4 |
> tree ;). The only information I can find claiming copyright and |
| 5 |
> licensing by one of the DCO authors is at |
| 6 |
> http://developercertificate.org/. I suppose you could alter the DCO |
| 7 |
> and claim it's under a different license, but the Linux Foundation |
| 8 |
> lawers wrote the thing, so I think it's more respectful to take them |
| 9 |
> at their word or just write your own certificate from scratch. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
The Linux Foundation was founded only in 2007, so it is not possible |
| 12 |
that its lawyers wrote the DCO, which (version 1.1) is from 2005. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
In fact, the OSDL, as one of the predecesors of the Linux Foundation, |
| 15 |
had released the DCO under these terms [1]: |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
© 2005 Open Source Development Labs, Inc. The Developer's |
| 18 |
Certificate of Origin 1.1 is licensed under a Creative Commons |
| 19 |
Attribution-ShareAlike 2.5 License. If you modify you must use a |
| 20 |
name or title distinguishable from "Developer's Certificate of |
| 21 |
Origin" or "DCO" or any confusingly similar name. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Certainly the copyright holders can re-release it under more |
| 24 |
restrictive terms, but they cannot retroactively take away from us the |
| 25 |
rights that they have granted us under CC BY-SA 2.5. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Ulrich |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20060524185355/http://www.osdlab.org/newsroom/press_releases/2004/2004_05_24_dco.html |
Archives