file headers

[Jan Hudec]

On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 23:31:09 +0100, Erik Bågfors wrote:
> 2006/2/24, Jan Hudec <bulb at ucw.cz>:
> > On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 16:06:47 -0600, John A Meinel wrote:
> > > Jan Hudec wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 15:32:20 -0600, John A Meinel wrote:
> > > >> Erik Bågfors wrote:
> > > >>> 2006/2/24, Robert Collins <robertc at robertcollins.net>:
> > > >>>> Lets talk about how the top of a source file should look, so we can all
> > > >>>> agree that we've agreed :).
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> # Copyright (C) 2006 by Canonical Ltd
> > > >>> Should all source be copyright to Canonical, does that mean that if we
> > > >>> have contributed anything, we have to sign copyright over?
> > > >>>
> > > >>> /Erik
> > > >> I would like to hear what Canonical has to say about this.
> > > >>
> > > >> I realize it is easier if one entity owns all of the copyrights, not to
> > > >> say people don't own their own work, just that more than one group can
> > > >> have the right to copy. Having a unified group own everything means that
> > > >> if there were ever a need to change the license (like the upcoming
> > > >> possible move to GPL v3), it is nearly impossible without having a
> > > >> unified group.
> > > >
> > > > As for move to GPL v3, bzr is licenced as 'GPL v2 or, at your option, any
> > > > later version'. Therefore I think (IANAL) anyone can change it to GPL v3 or,
> > > > at your option, any later version' in any particular copy and it will then
> > > > apply to all versions derived from that copy (but not to versions derived
> > > > from earlier copies, which it won't anyway, since you can't change the
> > > > licensing retroactively).
> > > >
> > > >> I suppose that might be one reason to keep Authors, though. Since it is
> > > >> kind of a "and these people have rights to this code too."
> > > >
> > > > For one think I vaguely recall GPL actually requires it (though I am not
> > > > going to look it up now - maybe it's FSF or some guidelines to require that).
> > > >
> > >
> > > I'm sure GPL doesn't require it, because the Linux kernel is GPL v2
> > > only, and everyone owns their own code. Which is why the kernel will
> > > have little to no chance of ever becoming v3.
> >
> > I refered to the list of authors here.
> >
> > > I do believe it is an FSF guideline, because it vastly simplifies future
> > > licensing. Imagine someone wrote a large portion of the codebase
> > > (Martin), and then decided to go into the peace corps, and not be
> > > available for a couple of years. And in the meantime, the GPL v2 broke
> > > down in the court system, for some weird loophole.
> > >
> > > Anyway, I think it is a good guideline. I would just like to hear
> > > Canonical's stance. (I would be more comfortable giving copyright to FSF
> > > than Canonical, but I'm okay with Canonical having it). But I do think
> > > Canonical is more likely to turn something closed source than FSF would
> > > be. Doesn't mean it is likely, just more likely than the FSF.
> >
> > They won't be able to retoractively re-license anything anyway and the 'or,
> > at your option, any later version' gives Canonical the right to switch the
> > license at any particular revision to newer GPL.
> >
> 
> I'm not an expert on this but I belive...
> 
> 1) The "This software is under GPL v2 or later" means that I as a user
> can choose to use it at GPL v3 whenever I feel like it

I believe (IANAL) that 'I as a user can choose to use it at GPL v3 whenever
I feel like it' implies 'I can give it to you as GPL v3-or-later, even though
I got it as GPL v2-or-later' -- and of course you won't be able to go back.

> 2) canonical cannot change the licence in any way unless I as a
> copyright owner gives them my permission..

... I believe the very phrase 'or, at your option, any later version' is such
permission, though for a very limited change.

-- 
						 Jan 'Bulb' Hudec <bulb at ucw.cz>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20060224/b88beffb/attachment.pgp