[Twisted-Python] Re: [Twisted-commits] r13641 - No, consigning copyright means it is _not_ (C) you. Let's keep this file simple, please.
On Mon, Apr 25, 2005, Glyph Lefkowitz wrote:
Modified: trunk/LICENSE Log: No, consigning copyright means it is _not_ (C) you. Let's keep this file simple, please.
[snip]
+Copyright (c) 2004,2005 Twisted Matrix Labs, http://www.twistedmatrix.com/ +(except as listed below)
Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation files (the @@ -47,4 +23,5 @@ Copyright Exceptions:
- Portions copyright Massachusetts Institute of Technology, due to
contributions of staff and students.
I was reminded at the sprint that I needed to ask about this. My understanding of the license policy was as per http://twistedmatrix.com/bugs/issue903 -- ie, that the *only* thing commiters needed to do was to MIT license their contributions. This is all that http://twistedmatrix.com/developers/contributing currently states. Therefore, that was what I'd been getting people who contributed documentation to agree to, and that was my understanding of the licencing and copyright of my own contributions as of the date when the MIT licensing of Twisted began.
If the current policy is that copyright must be consigned to an entity called "Twisted Matrix Labs", then this policy needs to be confirmed, restored to the webpage, and the status of all contributions at least since the website change and probably since the licence change needs to be confirmed with individual contributors. Also, my own network of nebulous legal advice from dubious sources suggests that Australian contributors might want to seek legal advice about how to do copyright consignment: it was suggested to me that the status of your moral right to be identified as author needs to be firmly nailed down for the consignment to have any validity whatsoever.
-Mary
Just my 2 cents...
Also, my own network of nebulous legal advice from dubious sources suggests that Australian contributors might want to seek legal advice about how to do copyright consignment: it was suggested to me that the status of your moral right to be identified as author needs to be firmly nailed down for the consignment to have any validity whatsoever.
In many continental Europe countries as well (including France), moral rights of the author can't be given away - they are "fundamental rights" of the author. For software, it mainly includes the right to be mentioned and recognized as an author (or co-author).
Personally, I'm not quite convinced of the validity of copyright assignments on a multi-national scale. There probably are very specific (legal) wording requirements to be met that a free software project can't afford to deal with. Of course, as long as the author doesn't try to oppose and nullify the copyright assignment, there's no real problem.
(I know, GNU does it. But that still doesn't convince me, although I'm rather pro-copyleft and pro-FSF ;-))
Regards
Antoine.
Mary Gardiner wrote:
I was reminded at the sprint that I needed to ask about this.
Hi Mary, sorry for leaving this unanswered for so long. I've been ... busy :)
My understanding of the license policy was as per http://twistedmatrix.com/bugs/issue903 -- ie, that the *only* thing commiters needed to do was to MIT license their contributions. This is all that http://twistedmatrix.com/developers/contributing currently states. Therefore, that was what I'd been getting people who contributed documentation to agree to, and that was my understanding of the licencing and copyright of my own contributions as of the date when the MIT licensing of Twisted began.
OK, I apologize. This was apparently the impression I gave many people.
Just for the record, my intent was originally that we leave all of the already-consigned contributors still consigned, refer to myself as "Twisted Matrix Labs" for the purposes of holding the copyrights, until such time as a foundation with that name could be established. The individual contributors who could not consign (such as MIT) could be listed independently.
However, while the legal advice I've received over the years has conflicted, folks seem pretty unanimous on the fact that this is confusing and tenuous legally. Let's just put the names of *all* the individual contributors back into the license.
I think that also obviates the need for the "CREDITS" file.
On Mon, Aug 29, 2005, Glyph Lefkowitz wrote:
However, while the legal advice I've received over the years has conflicted, folks seem pretty unanimous on the fact that this is confusing and tenuous legally. Let's just put the names of *all* the individual contributors back into the license.
This is an OK resolution to me. For that matter, so would firming up the legal position of consignment, but I hear nought but a soft sighing sound where we'd want volunteers to do that work.
-Mary
And thanks for taking the time out to reply, too.
-Mary
participants (3)
-
Antoine Pitrou -
Glyph Lefkowitz -
Mary Gardiner