Hi Thorsten,

um, I think the point made here is that certain content is *not*
copyright-shared with Oracle, and thus cannot be (easily)
relicensed?

The point was about licenses and not copyright.

The mentioned wiki Copyright page says
   "Copyright 1999, 2010 by the contributing authors and
    Oracle and/or its affiliates."

I think you've lost me here. Since Oracle does not exclusively own
the copyright for individual content, surely it cannot relicense it
unilaterally? Especially it cannot remove copyright statements like
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Authors_licensing_declaration
as per http://openoffice.org/terms_of_use ยง4 c?

I understand your point but I actually think it is going into
the wrong direction. The license declaration is not a copyright
statement.

As per the wiki copyright page, Oracle and the contributing authors
co-own the copyright of the content. So this is the same situation
as for the code. As copyright co-owner, Oracle would be eligible
to relicense the content (as would the original contributors,
of course, and that is what they did in the license declaration).

Disclaimer: I have a stake in this, being one of the people listed
on the page above ...

Right. And again, I get your point and I especially get your
original motivation to join that declaration.

Best
Frank

Reply via email to