[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Original code

From: rjack
Subject: Original code
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 09:12:47 -0500
User-agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20071031)

In the ongoing BusyBox GPL lawsuit with Verizon, the
plaintiffs Rob Landley and Erik Andersen
must identify the specific source code in which *they*
claim ownership as the original authors. Does anyone have
any idea which source code is actually the plaintiffs sole
original work? The BusyBox site
lists a 12 MB patchfile and the following thirty five
derivative work contributors are acknowledged:


The following login accounts currently exist on (I.E. these people can commit patches into
subversion for the BusyBox, uClibc, and buildroot

aldot     :Bernhard Fischer
andersen  :Erik Andersen      - uClibc and BuildRoot
bug1      :Glenn McGrath
davidm    :David McCullough
gkajmowi  :Garrett Kajmowicz  - uClibc++ maintainer
jbglaw    :Jan-Benedict Glaw
jocke     :Joakim Tjernlund
landley   :Rob Landley        - BusyBox maintainer
lethal    :Paul Mundt
mjn3      :Manuel Novoa III
osuadmin  :osuadmin
pgf       :Paul Fox
pkj       :Peter Kjellerstedt
prpplague :David Anders
psm       :Peter S. Mazinger
russ      :Russ Dill
sandman   :Robert Griebl
sjhill    :Steven J. Hill
solar     :Ned Ludd
timr      :Tim Riker
tobiasa   :Tobias Anderberg
vapier    :Mike Frysinger

The following accounts used to exist on, but
don't anymore so I can't ask /etc/passwd for their names.
Rob Wentworth asked Google and recovered the names:

aaronl   :Aaron Lehmann
beppu    :John Beppu
dwhedon  :David Whedon
erik     :Erik Andersen
gfeldman :Gennady Feldman
jimg     :Jim Gleason
kraai    :Matt Kraai
markw    :Mark Whitley
miles    :Miles Bader
proski   :Pavel Roskin
rjune    :Richard June
tausq    :Randolph Chung
vodz     :Vladimir N. Oleynik

Rjack :)

-- "To establish infringement, two elements must be proven: (1) ownership of a valid copyright, and (2) copying of constituent elements of the work that are original."; Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Tel. Serv. Co., 499 U.S. 340, 361 (1991 --

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]