On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 2:08 PM, Antoine Pelisse <apeli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 9:51 PM, Brandon Casey <bca...@nvidia.com> wrote:
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may 
>> contain
>> confidential information.  Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or 
>> distribution
>> is prohibited.  If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the 
>> sender by
>> reply email and destroy all copies of the original message.
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> I'm certainly not a lawyer, and I'm sorry for not reviewing the
> content of the patch instead, but is that not a problem from a legal
> point of view ?
> I remember a video of Greg Kroah-Hartman where he talked about that
> (the video was posted by Junio on G+).

Me either thank God.  Are those footers even enforceable?  I mean,
really, if someone mistakenly sends me their corporate financial
numbers am I supposed to be under some legal obligation not to share
it?  I always assumed it was a scare tactic that lawyers like to use.

To address the text of the footer, I'd say the "intended recipient(s)"
are those on the "to" line which includes git@vger.kernel.org and the
implicit use is for inclusion and distribution in the git source code.

Anyway, I doubt I would have any influence on getting the footer
removed.  If Junio would rather me not submit patches with that
footer, then I'd try to find a workaround.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to