[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Bye - Bye , open source derivative works litigation

From: RJack
Subject: Re: Bye - Bye , open source derivative works litigation
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2010 16:53:09 -0500
User-agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20090812)

chrisv wrote:
Hyman Rosen wrote:

On 2/11/2010 3:14 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
The GPL seeks to deny creators of contributions forming
derivative work their copyright ownership in the sense that
contributors are purportedly impeded to license their copyright
as they see fit and should use the GPL and only the GPL instead.
This is generally correct. Since those creators of derivative works
do not have the right to create them without permission of the
rights holders, caviling at the restrictions is pointless. The
restrictions are known, and if they are not acceptable to the author who wishes to create a derivative work, then he should not create that work.

Man, you have the patience of a saint, dealing with these mental-midget trolling assholes "Alexander Terekhov" and "RJack".

The "Alexander" POS actually claims that someone becomes a co-author of something when they "agree and intend to do so", without needing the agreement of the original author(s)

If the "original authors" accept a developer's code to be integrated
into the BusyBox project they show their intent to include that new
contributor as a joint author. This acceptance is an *affirmative act*
by the original developers. See the BusyBox site  and "Contributing":

"If you're approved for an account, you'll need to send an email from
your preferred contact email address with the username you'd like to use
when committing changes to GIT, and attach a public ssh key to access
your account with."

It is these actions under "Contributing" that make BusyBox a jointly
owned work and has nothing to do with intent of the GPL.

"The Captain's scared them out of the water!"


RJack :)

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]