----- Original Message ----
> From: Gianugo Rabellino <[email protected]>
> To: [email protected]
> Sent: Tue, January 12, 2010 4:20:14 PM
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Dealing with copyright issue (See ESME-47)
>
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 4:23 PM, Joe Schaefer wrote:
> > I'm hoping another lengthy diatribe from you won't be
> > necessary. While I don't blame you for David's disappearance,
> > the reason we bother to document policy is so people don't
> > need to get creative with their legal understanding of how the ASF works.
> > In the future should this issue ever present itself to you,
> > I hope you will do the proper thing and point the errant person
> > at the relevant ASF policy
>
> That would be the same policy that says we _must_ remove copyright
> notices from source files, right?
Technically it says the copyright holder must do that, not the ASF.
I personally don't believe there are any statutory issues with moving
the copyright notice to NOTICE, and am certain it's not a tort to do that.
But the policy in question doesn't cover that act. If you'd like it
to cover that, this is the wrong list for that conversation.
> The same policy that is now being
> discarded in light of a compromise that makes very little sense and
> sets a dangerous precedent?
It is neither a compromise nor a precedent. It is a decision
in line with ASF policy and made by the project (and apparently
supported by members of the IPMC).
> No, I guess I have very little to add. But don't ask for my +1.
Trust me I wasn't.
