> Signed-off-by: Antonio R. Costa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > diff --git a/board/atmel/at572d940hfeb/atmel_mci.c > b/board/atmel/at572d940hfeb/atmel_mci.c > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000..065a85b > --- /dev/null > +++ b/board/atmel/at572d940hfeb/atmel_mci.c > @@ -0,0 +1,869 @@ > +/* > + * (C) Copyright 2008 Atmel Corporation > + * > + * Antonio R. Costa <antonio.costa <at> atmel.com> > + * <costa.antonior <at> gmail.com>
The U-Boot AT91 MCI driver is no longer the exclusive work of Atmel. So, I do not believe that a sole Atmel copyright is correct for the AT91 MCI driver. I added MMC 4.x support to the AT91 MCI driver a while back. In response to a request for AT91 MMC 4.x support, I submitted it to the list in the form of an informal patch against u-boot-1.1.5_atmel1.2 on April 29, 2008. Without much effort, I can see that much of the code that I added is still in the various files of the AT91 MCI driver, but my company's copyright has been removed. (Please note that I never removed anyone else's copyright.) I'm not implying that Antonio removed my company's copyright notice, since I don't know exactly when the copyright was removed. However, when someone adds a significant amount of code to a source file of a free software (GNU GPL licensed) project, isn't it a reasonable expectation that their copyright would be respected and thus not removed? Can someone please clarify how copyright of derivative works is handled within the U-Boot source code trees? For example, how much source code needs to be added/modified/removed to justify a copyright notice for the changes? Thanks, Ken Fuchs ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php _______________________________________________ U-Boot-Users mailing list U-Boot-Users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/u-boot-users
