[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I'm no lawyer, but you can never 'take' over the copyright without a > legal agreement (or otherwise imply that OpenWrt is the sole > copyright holder). As far as I know, you can 'add' a copyright right > notice, but that still doesn't diminish the original authors rights > to the contribution. With makesfiles in particular, it could be > argued that they are derivatives (copied and modified) of some other > makefile, so they are released under the GPL as required - but still > doesn't mean OpenWrt 'owns' the work. Of course, this is only really > an issue if your intention is to commercially license these works > (contributions) to parties which can then modify them and release > under something other than the GPL. Is that the case? If not, then I > don't think it matters much. Personally, I don't think OpenWrt should > insert copyright notices on things it doesn't have copyright over. At > best, perhaps a "Part of OpenWrt" or "OpenWrt is a trademark of blah > blah" notices. For packages that weren't prepared by us, we didn't actually insert those copyright notices ourselves, they were left in there by the authors of the makefiles themselves. That's because people copy our templates and modify them for the specific packages that they're building (which is appropriate of course). So the question that florian asks is whether we can assume that by leaving in the copyright notice, the author assigned copyright to the project.
- Felix _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
