> On Nov 24, 2015, at 2:28 PM, Eric S. Raymond <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Kevin P. Fleming <[email protected]>:
>> And on the subject of the MIT- annd BSD-style licenses, removing the
>> license notice which contains the copyright holder(s)' name(s) and
>> replacing it with an SPDX license identifier is a material change.
>
> Altering copyrights is a different and much more legally dicey proposition
> than altering licenses. My code doesn't touch copyrights.
>
> Another common misconception, which the SPDX list unfortunately
> encourages, is that the copyright is part of the license.
That is incorrect. The SPDX specification treats the copyright notice in a
separate field, both at the package level and at the file level. Please see
section 3.16 and 4.8 - http://spdx.org/sites/spdx/files/SPDX-2.0.pdf
Jilayne
SPDX Legal Team co-lead
_______________________________________________
Spdx-tech mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.spdx.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx-tech
