[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Potential LSR licensing violations
From: |
Jean Abou Samra |
Subject: |
Re: Potential LSR licensing violations |
Date: |
Thu, 20 Oct 2022 09:48:09 +0200 (CEST) |
> Le 20/10/2022 09:30 CEST, Werner LEMBERG <wl@gnu.org> a écrit :
>
>
> >> You just don't become the copyright owner of the code, i.e., the
> >> copyright header in the source repository should give the name of
> >> the original author.
> > I have to correct myself. This is not correct, since copyright
> > doesn't exist for something in the public domain (as opposed to
> > something released under a permissive license). So the file headers
> > need not mention any copyright at all, if the code is unmodified.
> BTW, the term 'public domain' is problematic in Europe, since this US
> law construct doesn't necessarily mean the same in all countries, in
> particular not in Germany.[*]
>
> Maybe it should be changed to CC0
> (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/deed) for further
> contributions?
I'm not seeing clearly into what that means for us.
LSR is based in Italy (hosted on a server provided
by the University of Milan). If a German citizen
contributes a snippet, which definition of 'public
domain' applies?
- Potential LSR licensing violations, Jean Abou Samra, 2022/10/20
- Re: Potential LSR licensing violations, Luca Fascione, 2022/10/20
- Re: Potential LSR licensing violations, Jean Abou Samra, 2022/10/20
- Re: Potential LSR licensing violations, Luca Fascione, 2022/10/20
- Re: Potential LSR licensing violations, Jean Abou Samra, 2022/10/21
- Re: Potential LSR licensing violations, Kevin Barry, 2022/10/21
- Re: Potential LSR licensing violations, Jean Abou Samra, 2022/10/21
- Re: Potential LSR licensing violations, Kevin Barry, 2022/10/21
Re: Potential LSR licensing violations, Thomas Morley, 2022/10/20