This is the mail archive of the cygwin-talk mailing list for the cygwin project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Rsync over ssh (pulling from Cygwin to Linux) stalls..

On Fri, Aug 18, 2006 at 09:31:24AM -0400, Williams, Gerald S (Jerry) wrote:
>mwoehlke wrote:
>>Williams, Gerald S (Jerry) wrote:
>>> Whatever the reason, it interferes with my ability to contribute code
>>> to Cygwin even if I can package it separately, since my company will
>>> not sign the assignment. They will, however, allow me to release code
>>> into the public domain. 
>> FWIW, my impression is still that *you* could PD your code, and then
>> someone else who *can* sign an assignment can come along, make a
>> trivial change (like adding a comment, thus qualifying it as a
>> "derivative work" that can be copyrighted), and then submit it.
>Yes, I alluded to that earlier, although the language
>in the assignment may undermine the attempt. Specifically,
>you claim that "I hereby represent and warrant that I am
>the sole copyright holder for the Work and that I have the
>right and power to enter into this contract."
>The one time I offered to provide code under this sort of
>arrangement, it turned out to be easier to avoid the whole
>situation entirely and just have somebody else rewrite the
>code. So I never got an answer as to whether this would be
>Can anyone from RedHat acknowledge that this arrangement
>would be acceptable to them? If so, that would potentially
>open the door to any public domain code.

On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 12:17:20PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>The situation with Cygwin's license assignment is what it is.  Corinna
>can't change it and I can't change it.  If you don't like it, then don't
>contribute but please don't spend a lot of time complaining about how
>awful it is because you are just making noises at people who have no
>power to effect change.

On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 11:16:21AM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>What Red Hat lawyers (and I, the IANAL, for that matter) have figured
>out is that if someone sticks a "Public Domain" tag on a piece of
>software, you still have to go through due diligence to find out if the
>software is actually encumbered or not since anyone with a text editor
>can put anything they like in a file.  That would mean getting a release
>from the person's company.
>Red Hat does not have any interest in the "public domain".  Where Cygwin
>is concerned, they need to be absolutely certain that they either own
>the code or that the code's license is conformant with their needs.

On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 02:01:37PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>Again, I'll say that it is vanishingly unlikely that you will be talking
>to a Red Hat lawyer so if you can't sign the Cygwin license agreement,
>you won't be getting code into Cygwin.  There is no way to circumvent
>this requirement.

On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 12:57:40PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>I'm not sure what more needs to be discussed, really.  I think that
>Corinna has already said that if someone can't sign the agreement "as
>is", there isn't much that can be done.  It's a virtual certainty that
>Red Hat is not going to allocate time from one of its lawyers to talk
>about Cygwin licensing with some Cygwin end user.

On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 15:04:32 +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>The copyright assignment is as it is.  Either you can live with the
>assignment or you can't.  I signed the same copyright assignment long
>before I worked for Red Hat and several other people did so, too, so
>apparently I and other people can live with the copyright assignment.
>If you don't trust it, then, well, don't sign.  If you actually need
>legal advice for this, then don't ask me(*), ask a lawyer specialized
>in copyright law.


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