From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1I9BJu-0003iK-2c for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 13 Jul 2007 02:55:50 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l6D2spu3005905; Fri, 13 Jul 2007 02:54:52 GMT Received: from siemen.orkz.net (atwork-180.r-212.178.119.atwork.nl [212.178.119.180]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l6D2qxn6003680 for ; Fri, 13 Jul 2007 02:52:59 GMT Received: (qmail 48201 invoked by uid 98); 13 Jul 2007 02:52:43 -0000 Received: from 192.168.1.220 by siemen.orkz.net (envelope-from , uid 89) with qmail-scanner-1.25 (clamdscan: 0.88.4/1763. spamassassin: 3.1.4. Clear:RC:1(192.168.1.220):. Processed in 0.023316 secs); 13 Jul 2007 02:52:43 -0000 X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: jer@gentoo.org via siemen.orkz.net X-Qmail-Scanner: 1.25 (Clear:RC:1(192.168.1.220):. Processed in 0.023316 secs) Received: from unknown (HELO epia.jer-c2.orkz.net) (192.168.1.220) by siemen.orkz.net with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 13 Jul 2007 02:52:43 -0000 Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 04:53:10 +0200 From: Jeroen Roovers To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Watch out for license changes to GPL-3. Message-ID: <20070713045310.00190e19@epia.jer-c2.orkz.net> In-Reply-To: <20070712221136.39fe2b7b@snowflake> References: <4690C4B8.4000407@gentoo.org> <200707121610.48499.vapier@gentoo.org> <20070712211659.2a1f1aa5@snowflake> <200707121706.06405.vapier@gentoo.org> <20070712221136.39fe2b7b@snowflake> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 2.10.0 (GTK+ 2.10.11; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 9fe00397-1929-4eff-b0b6-35d9fe513c20 X-Archives-Hash: 7b2869de96fa17e7bd94fed662a11303 On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 22:11:36 +0100 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 17:06:05 -0400 > Mike Frysinger wrote: > > third parties are free to license however they like. > > Could the Foundation make a formal statement to that effect, and could > wolf31o2 retract his claim that all ebuilds are derived works of > skel.ebuild? Chris doesn't need to retract his claim, because his claim is very likely false or at best immaterial. Finding out whether one work is a derivative of another is much too expensive. It's easier to state a copyright claim, in effect surrendering the copyright to the Gentoo Foundation, and be done with it, and then let the Gentoo Foundation set the license, in this case GPL-2. This happens to be exactly what the file[0] in gentoo-x86 is for, but sadly there is no documentation that explains this policy at all, it seems. To be exact, by submitting an ebuild, you actively surrender the copyright to the ebuild to the Gentoo Foundation, formerly Gentoo Technologies, Inc. [1], the original commit of skel.build (later skel.ebuild) already made this very clear: # Copyright 1999-2000 Gentoo Technologies, Inc. # Distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License, v2 or later # Author Your Name # $Header$ I remember seeing a less subtle statement to this effect (that the copyright to anything you submit to Gentoo's CVS is passed on to the Gentoo Project) a long time ago, probably in the devrel/recruiters documentation during my own recruitment. Right now I can only find this: "===Headers=== When you submit your ebuilds, the header should be exactly the same as the one in /usr/portage/header.txt. Most importantly, do not modify it in anyway and make sure that the $Header: $ line is intact."[2] Sadly, currently no document on www.gentoo.org explains the judicial better than [3], which has this: "The bureaucracy we mention includes: [...] - juridical protection: backing up the licenses Gentoo uses, maintaining the copyrights on Gentoo's software, documentation and other assets and protecting Gentoo's intellectual property" and also: "In other words, the Gentoo Foundation will: [...] - protect the developed code, documentation, artwork and other material through copyright and licenses" I think this lack of clarity calls for some changes to at least the policy documents. Ebuilds can probably not be considered proper derivatives of skel.[e]build, but IANAL, I can only say that having a court find this would be very expensive, whatever the outcome. Therefore, the copyright to an ebuild is or should be actively and simply turned over to the Gentoo Foundation by the developer, and this should be made policy and should be explained properly in a few places in our documentation. Should I file a documentation bug about this? Kind regards, JeR [0] http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo-x86/header.txt [1] http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo-x86/skel.ebuild [2] http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/handbook/handbook.xml?part=2&chap=1 -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list