Mailing-List: contact legal-discuss-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Received-SPF: neutral (asf.osuosl.org: local policy)
Message-ID: <42EFC803.7030602@rowe-clan.net>
Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2005 14:22:43 -0500
From: "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wrowe@rowe-clan.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6-1.1.fc3 (X11/20050720)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Niclas Hedhman <niclas@hedhman.org>
CC: Ralph Goers <Ralph.Goers@dslextreme.com>,  legal-discuss@apache.org
Subject: Re: Copyright line in code contributions
References: <ce1f2ea805072913288f87239@mail.gmail.com>
 <42EEFFBA.9030901@dslextreme.com> <42EF892B.3060407@rowe-clan.net>
 <200508030134.35645.niclas@hedhman.org>
In-Reply-To: <200508030134.35645.niclas@hedhman.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> On Tuesday 02 August 2005 22:54, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> 
>>  * I am writing code for contribution to the ASF.  I do so under their
>>    copyright, not my own, because the code is created under the umbrella
>>    of the ASF and they are the owner/copyright holder from the code's
>>    very inception
> 
> 
> I actually think that Larry means that this is not happening, as you are not 
> employed and that there is no Copyright assign from you to ASF, which 
> (copyright assigns) in case of many european countries are possibly not even 
> contractually possible.

Correct.  In the state of California, as well as under the CCLA of my
employer granted to the ASF, this is.  Some individuals may be subject
to different circumstances, as you point out.

> Not sure, but it sounds strange that X could claim Copyright on behalf of Z, 
> without any agreement between the two. Such agreement does not exist in the 
> ASF CLA of today.

Actually it does.  As a member the relationship is quite clear.  As one
of our committers, it becomes fuzzier but the intent remains clear.  As
a random contributor, I agree, there is very little to stand on.

This is why CLA's are required not only of our committers (you can no
longer have an account/commit privilage without one) but also of major
contributions.

Section 2 of the CLA addresses this.  Section 4 addresses your prior
point.

Understand that without review, one's code does not become part of the
ASF until it's voted on, or a release is voted on.  So that grant of
copyright licence/contribution is provisional upon adoption by the ASF.

> Lawyers can probably clarify but as I understand it, "I do so under their 
> copyright" has no effect other than everyone's "feel good", which is also 
> important community-wise. :o)

This goes back to attributions in the source, which is the point of many
prior lengthy debates.  Spin a new thread in an appropriate forum such
as community@ if you desire to rehash it :)

Bill

---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only, are not privileged and do not constitute legal advice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org