www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Roy T. Fielding" <field...@gbiv.com>
Subject Re: Clarification of copyright assignments for contributions etc (was Fwd: C++ code contribution(
Date Thu, 06 Jul 2006 02:35:08 GMT
On Jul 5, 2006, at 10:16 AM, Cliff Schmidt wrote:
> On 7/5/06, Stephen McConnell (DPML) <mcconnell@apache.org> wrote:
>> This seems to contradict an earlier post from Roy Fielding
>> posted on this list.
>>   > -----Original Message-----
>>   > From: Roy T. Fielding [mailto:fielding@gbiv.com]
>>   > Sent: Tuesday, 6 June 2006 4:29 AM
>>   > To: Stephen McConnell (DPML)
>>   > Cc: legal-discuss@apache.org
>>   > Subject: Re: New copyright header policy
>>   >
>>   > On Jun 5, 2006, at 11:04 AM, Stephen McConnell ((DPML)) wrote:
>>   > > In addition to the above I would like to know the ASF position
>>   > > concerning potentially new contributions to the ASF  
>> associated to
>>   > > known and reachable contributors via existing copyright
>>   > > assertions who are unwilling to acquiesce to the removal of
>>   > > copyright statements from existing documents.
>>   >
>>   > The law does not allow us to remove or alter the copyright
>>   > notice without the copyright owner's consent.  When new
>>   > contributions are made, the responsible PMC decides whether
>>   > the contribution is in a form that they deem acceptable, and
>>   > either accepts it or rejects it.
>>   >
>>   > ....Roy
>> Is it correct to assume that the board directive mentioned by Bret
>> effectively overrides the potential for a decisions by a PMC
>> (as asserted by Roy) concerning this subject?
> I don't think the board should be micromanaging every case for PMCs,
> but if the board notices that a PMC appears to be allowing some
> authors (individuals or companies), but not others, to include their
> copyright notice within source files, there will be concerns from the
> board.  I have no idea what Roy was referring to or if there are other
> exceptions being proposed, but I would assume everyone wants this to
> be applied fairly to all parties.

I was referring to the state of affairs as of last month.  I have no
idea what, if any, resolution was recently passed by the board.  In any
case, if the board decides to mandate a single policy, then the PMC must
obey that policy when it evaluates a contribution.


DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only.  Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF.  See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org

View raw message