Hi Pierre, > The RFC process defines a veto and could be applied when needed.
Can you show me where that is defined please ? Cheers Joe On Mon, 16 Sep 2019 at 10:36, Peter Bowyer <phpmailingli...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, 15 Sep 2019 at 14:16, Zeev Suraski <z...@php.net> wrote: > > > > How can an undefined group have copyright vested in it? > > > > It's very much well-defined. And certainly not by Wikipedia, but in the > > PHP source code and the php.net website itself. Right at the top of the > > Credit page: > > https://www.php.net/credits.php > > > Respectfully, this is a list of people who are identified as part of the > PHP Group. > > My understanding is copyright has to be vested in individuals or > legally-recognised entities. The PHP Group is neither of those. The > wording "Copyright The PHP Group" is different to saying "Copyright the > individual contributors (hereafter referred to as "The PHP Group"). > > This led me to check that contributors to PHP do not have to assign > copyright to the PHP Group (I checked > https://github.com/php/php-src/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md > < > https://github.com/php/php-src/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#copyright-and-license-headers > >). > So what are the PHP Group holding copyright over? > > As ever I welcome being set right if this is inaccurate. > > > > > And more > > > importantly, how would it defend or deal with a copyright infringement > if > > > "The PHP Group" is not a recognised group or legal entity? > > > > Thankfully, copyright infringements are practically irrelevant as far as > > the PHP license is concerned. License violations are also pretty much > > irrelevant, with the only practical exception being someone breaking the > > clause that requires them not to use the name 'PHP' to promote a > derivative > > product. > > > I'm pleased that has been the case. Long may it continue. > > Peter >
