Christian Ohm schreef: > On Monday, 15 January 2007 at 23:18, Giel van Schijndel wrote: > >> since the original doesn't seem to get through: >> > I got the first one as well. > Hmm, very strange, I haven't, I guess it'll arrive some day later, but very much delayed then. >> So I guess you mean to put something like "copyright 2005 various >> authors" in between Eidos and WZRP? >> > Now that'd look quite stupid... I'd either just keep WZRP (since it is > the continuation of the previous effort, just named differently) or use > "Warzone Development Project" or whatever name was decided on back > then... > >> Legally I don't think it matters whether you do make note of "those >> various authors". Nor does it matter if you'd claim copyright on the >> changes made in 2005, since there is no law prohibiting claiming >> copyright when you don't legally poses it. >> > There is not? So if the real copyright holder complains, he does based > on what? > No, there isn't a law prohibiting copyright claims that cannot be justified. In fact I'd wish there was, that would/might stop some companies from digitizing public domain works such as paintings and other art from 1800 etc., only to claim copyright on it (copyright requires something to be an *original* work, merely scanning and possibly retouching a picture doesn't count as such).
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Avoid_Copyright_Paranoia has some info on this subject. >> 2) to Attribute or not to Attribute: >> I'm do not know for sure whether there is a legal obligation to make >> note of the copyright owned by those various authors. I do however think >> there is no such obligation unless the license (GPL in this case) >> requires it. >> > The GPL doesn't require it: "0. This License applies to any program or > other work which contains a notice placed by the copyright holder saying > it may be distributed under the terms of this General Public License." > The "put a header in every file" is just a guideline on how to put > things under the GPL and make it clear for everyone what the license > used is (besides being PR for the FSF and GPL), and that it was indeed > the copyright holder who chose that license. I see it might be time that I'd refresh my memory on the GPL again. But I guess you might be right. I might be mixing this up with the FDL (which I know *does* require all previous authors to be attributed unless one explicitly waives that right/privilege). -- Giel
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
