At the time of submission, I was not aware that Red Hat is a company that 
commits illegal actions.
And now I'm "explicitly stating" that I do not wish to include my work to the 
project.

On Sep 1, 2010, at 11:28 AM, Greg Barton wrote:

> See http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
> 
> "5. Submission of Contributions. Unless You explicitly state otherwise, any 
> Contribution intentionally submitted for inclusion in the Work by You to the 
> Licensor shall be under the terms and conditions of this License, without any 
> additional terms or conditions. Notwithstanding the above, nothing herein 
> shall supersede or modify the terms of any separate license agreement you may 
> have executed with Licensor regarding such Contributions."
> 
> Did you, at the time of submission, have a separate agreement?  In writing?  
> Signed by all parties?
> 
> GreG
> 
> On Aug 31, 2010, at 20:50, 山本 裕介 <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>>> At the time of your contributions to Drools and other projects you were a 
>>> Red Hat employee. The Red Hat legal department has determined that it has 
>>> the right to copy, modify and distribute your contributions under the 
>>> Apache License version 2.0 and considers this matter closed. 
>> 
>> Richard didn't explain that. 
>> I didn't use Red Hat time to fix those bugs, translate message resources. I 
>> believe that "I am/was a Red Hat employee" doesn't matter. I'm not paid for 
>> the task.
>> 
>> "At the time the code was contributed in good faith under the Apache 
>> license, you cannot then decide at a later date to change your mind."
>> My understanding is that people just do not want to undone their 
>> contributions usually. That is how OSS works.
>> Technically the copyright holder of translated message resources, program 
>> codes is the originator.
>> I agreed to distribute my work under the ASL, but I didn't tell that I 
>> willingly give away the copyright to the project.
>> Anybody who originates their work (i.e. the copyright holder) should be able 
>> to decide the license at a later date.
>> 
>> Richard, any comment?
>> 
>> On Sep 1, 2010, at 8:27 AM, Michael Neale wrote:
>> 
>>> So is the reason that there is a dispute over another copyright holder? (ie 
>>> these changes were copied in violation of that copyright in the first 
>>> place) - or a case of changing-minds about rights to the commits of the 
>>> original work? (if the latter then close the issue - nothing can or should 
>>> be done - as it is a licencing issue then, not a copyright issue, and as 
>>> Mark says the licence doesn't permit that revoking). 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 7:56 AM, Mark Proctor <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Yusuke,
>>> At the time of your contributions to Drools and other projects you were a 
>>> Red Hat employee. The Red Hat legal department has determined that it has 
>>> the right to copy, modify and distribute your contributions under the 
>>> Apache License version 2.0 and considers this matter closed. If you have 
>>> any further need to discuss this please do so with Red Hat legal, - you 
>>> have their contact details.
>>> 
>>> Even if you were not a Red Hat employee, which you were at the time, you 
>>> cannot undo an OSS code contribution, that is not how OSS licensing works. 
>>> At the time the code was contributed in good faith under the Apache 
>>> license, you cannot then decide at a later date to change your mind. The 
>>> OSS licenses, be it ASL or LGPL or GPL, are designed specifically to 
>>> provide certainty in that area. Without this level of certainty end user 
>>> OSS adoption would be a minefield as every time developers fall out, which 
>>> happens often, one could demand all their code be removed and this would 
>>> impact everyone who has invested time installing that software in 
>>> production systems.
>>> Mark
>>> 
>>> On 31/08/2010 17:41, 山本 裕介 wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> I have consulted RH legal dept. only to get no meaningful response.
>>>> I guess Edson is the one who commit most of these files.
>>>> The how and why they need to be uncommitted is attached to the Jira issue.
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Yusuke
>>>> 
>>>> On Sep 1, 2010, at 1:34 AM, Mauricio Salatino wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Hi Yusuke, good question. I'm not sure where is the right place, but you 
>>>>> are only asking to rollback your changes right?
>>>>> who commit all your contributions to the jboss repo?
>>>>> I also saw that you mention: "For several reasons, I decided to withdraw 
>>>>> those contributions introduced from my spare time. "
>>>>> can you mention those reasons? so we, as community can learn why you want 
>>>>> to remove your contributions. I'm just curious.
>>>>> Greetings.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 12:50 PM, 山本 裕介 <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> Where is the appropriate forum for copyright issues?
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Sep 1, 2010, at 12:45 AM, Greg Barton wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> > This is not the appropriate forum for copyrighgt issues.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > GreG
>>>>> >
>>>>> > On Aug 31, 2010, at 9:40, 山本 裕介 <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Hi,
>>>>> >
>>>>> > There's a copyright violation issue on Drools 5.1 release.
>>>>> > Please remove the changes listed in the following issue.
>>>>> > https://jira.jboss.org/browse/JBRULES-2660
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Thanks,
>>>>> > Yusuke
>>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>>> > rules-users mailing list
>>>>> > [email protected]
>>>>> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>>> > rules-users mailing list
>>>>> > [email protected]
>>>>> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> rules-users mailing list
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> -- 
>>>>>  - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com  
>>>>>  - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
>>>>>  - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>>>>>  
>>>>>  - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> rules-users mailing list
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> rules-users mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> rules-dev mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Michael D Neale
>>> home: www.michaelneale.net
>>> blog: michaelneale.blogspot.com
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> rules-dev mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> rules-dev mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
> 
> _______________________________________________
> rules-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev

_______________________________________________
rules-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev

Reply via email to