This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-xfree@cygwin.com
mailing list for the Cygwin XFree86 project.
RE: Copyright [cgf, please comment]
- To: "'Harold Hunt'" <huntharo at msu dot edu>, Suhaib Siddiqi <ssiddiqi at inspirepharm dot com>
- Subject: RE: Copyright [cgf, please comment]
- From: Suhaib Siddiqi <ssiddiqi at inspirepharm dot com>
- Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 15:41:43 -0400
- Cc: "'cygx'" <cygwin-xfree at cygwin dot com>
Harold
> > When I started this project (Cygwin/Xfree86) two years ago,
> I assigned my
> > Copyright to Cygwin Solutions, which is now Red Hat.
>
That is Cygnus solutions.
> I'm pretty sure the copyright assignment form that Cygwin
> requests only
> applies to contributions to the Cygwin project.
>
> In any case, your having filled out the form only has an
> effect on what you
> write, not what anyone else writes :)
Not necessarily. I m not a lawyer, but assignmentw as for project.
>
> > The Source code changes to Xfree86 source tree were
> > transferred to Xfree86 Inc. under their license agreement.
>
> Contributions to the XFree86 tree generally have the
> copyright owned by the
> author of the file; you'd have to fill out some very strange
> legal forms to
> assign XFree86 contributions to RedHat, and there isn't
> really any reason to
> do so.
That goes to Xfree86 according to X license as I said :-)
>
> Copyright of the changes I have made generally belong to
> XFree86, though I
> really should have filled out some paperwork indicating this
> transfer of
> copyright on the new files that I made.
Yes, my changes to source code belong to Xfree86 too
>
> > However, other
> > material posted or contributed to this project, such as
> Url, HTML pages,
> > User Guides and FAQ etc etc, authors retain Authorship, not
> the Copyright.
>
> That all depends on what the author chose to do with the
> copyright when they
> wrote the works in question. Posting a work on a RedHat
> owned web server
> does not constitute a transfer of copyright, as copyright
> transfer is a
> legal mechanism that requires formal paperwork.
Red Hat has the right to remove it. That is what I had been told.
RedHat will give you authorship, but copyright you need to discuss
with Chris Faylor directly. If he allows I will leave everyones document
as it is.
>
> For example, the Cygwin/XFree86 User's Guide and the
> Cygwin/XFree86 FAQ
> (draft) both are copyrighted by Harold L Hunt II (me :).
FAQ cannot be copyright by you. I first wrote FAQ and Rob modified it.
Technically and legally there are several authors. That is another question
we need to resolve peacfully through private communications :-)
> Furthermore, the
> GNU FDL that is contained in both documents is copyrighted by the Free
> Software Foundation; I really doubt that RMS would agree that
> posting the
> FSF's FDL license on a web server constitues a transfer of
> copyright :)
>
> I chose to retain the copyright on my writings primarily because doing
> otherwise would require:
> 1) Finding an organization that wishes to vigorously defend
> the copyright of
> the works I have produced
> 2) I can't just arbitrarily decide that the copyright on my
> work belongs to
> someone else,
Then do not post please without first clearing with people in-charge of the
project.
I follow the same Guidelines I do not post something which might raise
questions later.
In that case I consult with RedHat folks first to clarify and get
permission.
Your rest of the GFDL I leave as it is because I am not a legal expert to
answer
I know Cygwin and many software are GPL and copyright belong to RedHat and
respective companies.
Suhaib
>I have to sign legal paperwork in order for the
> copyright
> transfer to hold up in court; failing to do so would likely
> result in the
> works becoming public domain, which was not my original intention.
>
> I should point out that public domain is undesireable because
> it lacks the
> "copyleft" of the FDL which allows any future author to
> modify my original
> works. For example, Company Foo could modify a public domain
> document, Baz,
> and they could prevent others from publishing or distributing those
> modifications. Whereas the FDL forces any modifications of
> the original
> work to be licensed under the FDL, ad infinitum.
>
> I don't fully understand why this has been brought up at all?
> If it has
> anything to due with questions of what would happen should
> the author of
> certain works become unavailable, then the answer is simple.
> The FDL and X
> licenses allow everyone to do almost anything they wish with
> the works that
> I have produced. For example, the Cygwin/XFree86 User's Guide can be
> modified, printed, distributed on purple paper with white
> polka dots, or
> disregarded entirely; all of these uses and more are
> permitted by the FDL,
> regardless of what I think :) Source code that I have
> produced under the X
> license allows the previously mentioned freedoms plus the
> ability to modify
> what I have done without releasing your modifications in
> source code form.
>
> Ownership of the copyright on works related to Cygwin/XFree86 only
> determines whom is obligated to prosecute offending parties
> if the terms of
> the licenses covering the works are violated.
>
> Harold
>