On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 8:59 AM, Chip Childers <chip.child...@sungard.com> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 2:41 PM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 2:36 PM, Noah Slater <nsla...@tumbolia.org> wrote: >>> Saying that configuration files, in all cases, are not copywritable because >>> that are, on the whole, not as complex as code is like saying that blog >>> posts, in all cases, are not copywritable because they are, on the whole, >>> not as complex as books. >>> >>> The law is much more nuanced than that. There is no way we can say, up >>> front, whether a configuration file is protected by copywrite or not. The >>> unwillingness to commit to anything on legal-discuss is an indication of >>> this. (It was made explicit that with a vague question, there will only be >>> vague answers.) >>> >>> It might be better to actually document what we have, and then present that >>> to legal discuss and take it from there. >>> >>> Let's get concrete. >>> >>> We should put together a list of each config file path, along with >>> information such as: >>> >>> * Size of file >>> * Complexity (key/value, code snippets, what?) >>> * Copyright notice or license header? >>> * License of project it (may) have been taken from >>> * Origin (Citrix, upstream project, unknown?) >>> >>> Once we have a complete picture, I think we can talk about how to proceed. >>> >>> (And hopefully propose a guideline for future config files.) >>> >>> I certainly do not think we are in a position to write of an entire >>> category of data as being uncopywritable. >>> >>> I am happy to run this to pursue this with legal too, but I think we need a >>> better view of what we're dealing with. >>> >>> Thoughts? >>> >> >> >> Alright, I'll start working on compiling this. >> >> --David >> > > David, > > Do you want to divide and conquer on this task? I'd be happy to help. > > -chip
Happy to have the help --David
