I will try, not to have this much patience in the future.
/Linus
2009/3/24 Tom Morris <[email protected]>
> Here are my notes from the conference call for any who's interested.
> As you can see, the situation hasn't changed.
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Tom Morris <[email protected]>
> Date: Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 6:57 AM
> Subject: DRAFT- ArgoUML license change conference call notes - 19 Dec 2007
> To: Linus Tolke <[email protected]>
>
>
> Here's a quick draft from my notes. It needs more review, but I won't
> be able to do that until tonight (at least 12 hrs from now).
>
> Tom
> ----------
> Linus Tolke <[email protected]>, "Bradley M. Kuhn"
> <[email protected]>, [email protected],
> [email protected]
>
> Attendees:
> ArgoUML: Linus Tolke, project leader; Tom Morris, developer
> Software Freedom Conservancy: Bradley Kuhn, president; Richard
> Fontana, staff lawyer; Karen Sandler, staff lawyer
>
> Meeting Purpose: Review potential legal issues with relicensing
> ArgoUML under a different license than the current one
>
> Provenance of Intellectual Property - Although the meeting was
> nominally about what would be needed to switch to a new license, the
> lawyers were concerned about the provenance of the existing source
> code, so we spent a good portion of the call discussing this. Because
> our copyright headers list the University of California (UC) Regents
> as the copyright holder, but there's never been an explicit copyright
> grant by the majority of our contributors, it was suggested that a
> mailing be down to all contributors of record with a listing of their
> contributions (CVS/SVN log), stating our assumption that they held a
> valid copyright to these contributions and that they granted license
> rights to those contributions, and asking for positive confirmation
> (or perhaps just objections?). It is assumed that all UC staff and
> student contributions (pre-open source project) have clear provenance
> based on employment agreements and student agreements granting
> ownership to the UC Regents.
>
> Copyright ownership - The "ArgoUML team" isn't a valid copyright owner
> since it isn't a legal entity. It would be possible to assign the SFC
> as the owner, but they currently have no infrastructure in place to
> manage this. The alternative is to have the individual authors
> maintain ownership (as is the default under copyright law). Copyright
> assignment to the SFLC by individual developers may add some liability
> protection for the developers.
>
> Relicensing - There is no legal conflict between the current BSD
> license and any of the possible future licenses that we discussed
> (EPL, LGPL, GPL with Classpath exception) and there is no legal reason
> to prefer one over the other. The most important recommendation from
> the lawyers in choosing a new license is to read it carefully and make
> sure it needs the project. The each contain their own little
> subtleties and quirks.
>
> Eclipse Public License notes - It contains a choice of law clause
> saying that New York state
>
>
> Ohloh lists 58 contributors from its SVN scan. At least three of
> those are pseudo accounts (root, httpd, tigrisc), another four only
> have a single commit, and eleven have less than ten commits each
> (although a single commit could consist of an entire working plugin
> module).
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
> http://argouml.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=450&dsMessageId=1403290
>
> To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [
> [email protected]].
> To be allowed to post to the list contact the mailing list moderator,
> email: [[email protected]]
>
------------------------------------------------------
http://argouml.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=450&dsMessageId=1482493
To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail:
[[email protected]].
To be allowed to post to the list contact the mailing list moderator, email:
[[email protected]]
