This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the glibc project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Copyright issue with memcpy/memset parts of the CRIS port


[Title change to a less misleading one, from
 Re: CRIS port 1/8: Prerequisite patch for configure.in]

> Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2001 16:46:21 -0500
> From: Mark Brown <bmark@us.ibm.com>

> Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote on 08/04/01 10:01 PM:
> 
> >> From: Ulrich Drepper <drepper@redhat.com>
> >> Date: 08 Apr 2001 19:31:22 -0700
> > 
> >> Hans-Peter Nilsson <hans-peter.nilsson@axis.com> writes:
> >> 
> >>> While speaking on copyright assignment, I should mention that there are
> >>> two files which I believe Axis would like to retain copyright on; an
> >>> optimized memset.c and memcpy.c.
> >> 
> >> This isn't possible.  The files cannot be added.
> > 
> > Bother.  Why isn't it possible?  Several other files in glibc
> > have copyright other than FSF.
> > 
> > Now, I'm not necessarily opposed to Axis submitting copyright to
> > FSF for those files, but I think I need a reason to show people
> > who'll question that change, considering they're already "free".

(Two sentences of some importance were not included in the quote above:)
Basically the same files are already distributed with Linux
2.4.2.  I don't really know how to handle the issue, so I just
believe it is best that Axis keep the copyright on them.

> FSF requires this (submitting copyright to FSF), to ensure that it has
> the freedom to open them to the world, without the possibility of a
> lawsuit down the road. It took some time for IBM legal to accept this,
> too, but accept it they did. It really is the safest policy for the FSF
> to take.

It slipped my mind that (IIRC) it *is* general FSF and therefore
GNU maintainer policy to not accept *any new* code to central
parts of the GNU system without assigned copyright (here
excluding the Linux kernel).  Though it would have helped if
Drepper as glibc maintainer explicitly stated that; I shouldn't
speak for him.

I have re-read the assign.future Axis and RMS signed.  In one of
the clauses it says:

 (d) FSF agrees to grant back to Developer, and does hereby grant,
 non-exclusive, royalty-free and non-cancellable rights to use the
 Works (i.e., Developer's changes and/or enhancements, not the Program
 that they enhance), as Developer sees fit; this grant back does not
 limit FSF's rights and public rights acquired through this agreement.

Which should cover (at least) usage of the code in question
within the Linux kernel as well as any usage in otherwise closed
source of any code being either origin or derivation of the
files we're talking about.  Well, that is, to the best of my
legally-uneducated understanding.

Perhaps we should clear this with RMS anyway.  I'm interested in
a comment from Drepper.

brgds, H-P


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]