On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 07:57:35AM -0700, Josh Parmenter wrote:
On Mar 18, 2009, at 7:24 AM, Graham Percival wrote:
If I don't produce any copyrightable source code, then its
ownership can't be in question, right?)
Why isn't the code copyrightable?
Because I don't write it in the first place. :)
It IS copyrightable, but the open-source license lays out under what
terms others can use it.
Yes, but I can only place source code under an open-source license
if I own that code. If I'm working under a contract that states
that the university owns everything[1] I do -- which I /am/ --
then I cannot make anything open-source.
[1] everything created "with university resources" or "that is
significantly similar to their university duties" (those are
paraphrases, not exact quotes)
Right now, if there's any question whether music notation is
"significantly similar" to the computer music research I'm doing
(they actually *aren't* similar, but I'm not certain that a
university administrator would realize this), then the university
can only lay claim to emails like this one. Big deal. It's not
like Valentin can retroactively not act upon my suggestions. :)
However, if I were to write code for lilypond and any legal issues
arose, then the lilypond project might be in trouble. At the very
least, we'd need to remove whatever features I added or bugs I
fixed.
That's why I'll start as a Frog after I leave this job, and not
before. :)
Cheers,
- Graham