Sorry to be the voice of descent here, but I don't think 1C is viable. (Without knowing more specifics about what we're talking about here.)
Copyright law does not concern itself with distinctions like "executable code vs config file". Copyright concerns itself with *creative works*. So if the config file is large enough to be deemed a creative work, then copyright applies. Now, from my work with the FSF, I remember this rule of thumb: If a person contributes more than around 15 lines of code and/or text that > is legally significant for copyright purposes, we need copyright papers for > that contribution, as described above. A change of just a few lines (less than 15 or so) is not legally > significant for copyright. A regular series of repeated changes, such as > renaming a symbol, is not legally significant even if the symbol has to be > renamed in many places. Keep in mind, however, that a series of minor > changes by the same person can add up to a significant contribution. What > counts is the total contribution of the person; it is irrelevant which > parts of it were contributed when. We can be fairly certain this was vetted by the FSF's legal council. I do not think that the ASF has something similar to this, but I think it is sound advice non-the-less. I do not believe we have the right to assume something is not a creative work just because we class it as "configuration". (It could be argued that a simple Rails app is just "configuration" for instance. Heh, heh, heh.) Where do these config files come from? Where are they located? What do we want to do with them? How many are there? (Feel free to point me to mailing list threads, if these have already been answered.) On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 8:55 AM, Wido den Hollander <w...@widodh.nl> wrote: > On 09/12/2012 09:42 PM, Chip Childers wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> (Looking for mentor guidance here as well please!) >> >> On this topic, we need to come together as a community to figure out >> how we want to proceed with these configuration files. It doesn't >> seem like we are going to get a definitive answer on legal-discuss@a.o >> without asking about a specific file from a specific source. There >> HAS been a little discussion about the ability of a configuration file >> to be copyright on the legal list, but it didn't go much further than >> a couple of emails. >> >> As far as I can tell, we have some options: >> >> 1 - Do a file by file audit to confirm the source and if there is any >> claim of copyright on those files, and then either: >> 1.A - Ask the source project if they would consider granting a >> different license for just that config file. >> 1.B - Ask legal-discuss@a.o for specific exemptions >> 1.C - Do nothing, because the file isn't something that a copyright is >> claimed on (and we wouldn't claim a copyright either) >> > > I'd go for 1C > > Wido > > > 1.D - Spec out the requirements, and have someone attempt a clean-room >> implementation (I think that I could find someone if it gets to this) >> 2 - Follow up on the concept of configuration files not being >> protected by copyright, and ask for a ruling from legal-discuss on >> that idea. >> >> There may be other options that I'm missing. I'm looking for opinions >> and suggestions for how to move forward, since this is absolutely one >> of the blocker issues for a 4.0 release. Thoughts? >> >> -chip >> >> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 2:36 PM, Chip Childers <chip.child...@sungard.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Chiradeep, >>> >>> Would you mind putting together the specific example data being >>> requested by Daniel [1] on legal-discuss@a.o in response to the legal >>> Jira that you raised [2]? >>> >>> The legal thread includes some discussion on the possibility of config >>> files even being something that could enjoy license protection, but we >>> should probably plan on dealing with the potential provenance issues >>> anyway. >>> >>> -chip >>> >>> [1] - >>> http://markmail.org/message/**p6kxbvzybyu552p2<http://markmail.org/message/p6kxbvzybyu552p2> >>> [2] - >>> https://issues.apache.org/**jira/browse/LEGAL-146<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-146> >>> >> > -- NS
