From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.105.134.102] (helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Dn8ro-0007gT-QO for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 28 Jun 2005 05:42:41 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j5S5gCpH016314; Tue, 28 Jun 2005 05:42:12 GMT Received: from zproxy.gmail.com (zproxy.gmail.com [64.233.162.204]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j5S5gAlq026975 for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2005 05:42:11 GMT Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id v1so292294nzb for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2005 22:42:37 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=QQ3a4RNHTFE7eXJTvxOGdrdj6BttT1WoimONfLpevIBBQsWlICzOJTUpZVfyjpkX8H4f/IksbBy1qSmRdsNKSr22TjtR5NI5ds0ypw9gGl/wnDdT8HOnsk2Btp8hF6+tjpwaf4AyEnYlHHX1hE5BB6RUppr7bZryl/N5CIW/H2E= Received: by 10.36.82.12 with SMTP id f12mr714089nzb; Mon, 27 Jun 2005 22:42:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.36.109.13 with HTTP; Mon, 27 Jun 2005 22:42:37 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <226689f10506272242c1330f7@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2005 22:42:37 -0700 From: Daniel Robbins To: Donnie Berkholz Subject: Re: [gentoo-trustees] copyright stuff Cc: Deedra Waters , Sven Vermeulen , gentoo-trustees@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <42C0C3B4.7070703@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-trustees@gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_626_21197183.1119937357372" References: <20050627201759.GA9776@gentoo.org> <42C0AEA1.7050108@gentoo.org> <42C0C3B4.7070703@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 00afae7e-5310-439c-8795-e61f98dba540 X-Archives-Hash: 47d816977210ce01033366c820a749fe ------=_Part_626_21197183.1119937357372 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Hi guys, I'm still on this list. You can remove me if you want, though. (If you're= =20 going to, please send me a courtesy email to let me know when I've been bumped) My advice is to define a clear goal. What are you trying to accomplish?=20 Then, talk to your lawyers about some practical steps you can take to get as close to this goal as you can.= =20 Your lawyers can help you=20 to determine what tradeoffs, if any, should be considered.=20 You might also want to ask your lawyers their opinion about how important= =20 they think this copyright issue actually is. If it's very important, it might be worthwhile upsetting= =20 and potentially losing some developers to fix it. If it isn't that important, then it might not be.=20 Maybe there are some key areas that you could straighten out more easily (like the Portage code itself) and the= n=20 others you could at least=20 temporarily ignore due to their complexity. I'm thinking of the actual=20 ebuilds being a very complex issue. Which is more likely to be ripped off? This should all factor into your=20 plan. I have tried to tackle this issue in the past, and it is harder than it=20 looks. I think I would have been more successful if I had tried to straighten out copyrights for some key areas o= f=20 Gentoo rather than try to tackle everything at once. Ebuilds are particularly thorny because so many people= =20 have touched them.=20 If fixing all the ebuilds is an impossible goal, then maybe focus on the=20 possible instead? I hope you can find a good solution. If you're ever in need of any=20 additional paperwork from me, please let me know. -Daniel On 6/27/05, Donnie Berkholz wrote:=20 >=20 > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 >=20 > Deedra Waters wrote: > > I'd suggest the license. I suspect that as long as the terms are right, > > that people won't have problems with the license. Trying to maintain > > both a copyright, and a license would cause a lot of problems, and a > > copyright is much harder to handle since we would have to get anyone > > under 18 to get their parents to sign the thing etc etc etc. >=20 > People under 18 can't consent to a license any more than an assignment, > so I don't understand your last point. But yes, maintaining both would > be more work. The question is: Is it worth it? >=20 > Thanks, > Donnie > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) >=20 > iD8DBQFCwMO0XVaO67S1rtsRAk1BAKDgLzs1y0SOkNO2ThVfnMbs5nBEXwCgjFmv > ZQB0X4QB6xceRMVCzjggbxw=3D > =3DMyVE > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > -- > gentoo-trustees@gentoo.org mailing list >=20 > ------=_Part_626_21197183.1119937357372 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline
Hi guys,
 
I'm still on this list. You can remove me if you want, though. (If you= 're going to, please send me a
courtesy email to let me know when I've been bumped)
 
My advice is to define a clear goal. What are you trying to accom= plish? Then, talk to your lawyers about
some practical steps you can take to get as close to this go= al as you can. Your lawyers can help you
to determine what tradeoffs, if any, should be considered. <= /div>
 
You might also want to ask your lawyers their opinion about how import= ant they think this copyright
issue actually is. If it's very important, it might be worthwhile upse= tting and potentially losing some
developers to fix it. If it isn't that important, then it might not be= . Maybe there are some key areas that
you could straighten out more easily (like the Portage code = itself) and then others you could at least
temporarily ignore due to their complexity. I'm thinking of the actual= ebuilds being a very complex issue.
Which is more likely to be ripped off? This should all factor into you= r plan.
 
I have tried to tackle this issue in the past, and it is harder than i= t looks. I think I would have been more
successful if I had tried to straighten out copyrights for some key ar= eas of Gentoo rather than try to tackle
everything at once. Ebuilds are particularly thorny because so many pe= ople have touched them.
If fixing all the ebuilds is an impossible goal, then maybe = focus on the possible instead?
 
I hope you can find a good solution. If you're ever in need of any add= itional paperwork from me, please
let me know.
 
-Daniel
 
On 6/27/05, = Donnie Berkholz <spyderous@g= entoo.org> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE---= --
Hash: SHA1

Deedra Waters wrote:
> I'd suggest the licens= e. I suspect that as long as the terms are right,
> that people won't have problems with the license. Trying to mainta= in
> both a copyright, and a license would cause a lot of problems, a= nd a
> copyright is much harder to handle since we would have to get = anyone
> under 18 to get their parents to sign the thing etc etc etc.
People under 18 can't consent to a license any more than an assignment,so I don't understand your last point. But yes, maintaining both would
be more work. The question is: Is it worth it?

Thanks,
Donnie=
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
<= br>iD8DBQFCwMO0XVaO67S1rtsRAk1BAKDgLzs1y0SOkNO2ThVfnMbs5nBEXwCgjFmv
ZQB0X4QB6xceRMVCzjggbxw=3D
=3DMyVE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--<= br>gentoo-trustees@gentoo.org= mailing list


------=_Part_626_21197183.1119937357372-- -- gentoo-trustees@gentoo.org mailing list