Since OpenSSL does not exist as an entity that requires contributors to
sign over their legal interests in their contributions, it is my opinion
that each contributor retains their legal interest in their contributions.
By contributing it to OpenSSL, one can argue that they've consented to the
use and distribution of their contributions according to OpenSSL's license.
But no single entity has any special authority to interpret or modify that
license.
DS
> Just as a point of reference, who is OpenSSL. Is it a corporation, a
> public trust, a private company or what? If we had a license issue,
> and I wanted our attorney to clarify any license issues, where does
> he go? Would any agreement made be legally binding? If so,
> under the laws of what country? Does Eric Young retain copyright
> over OpenSSL, and is his copyright statement still required? If Eric
> stills holds a legal interest in OpenSSL, can he sell it to someone,
> like RSA?
>
> I thought the license issue questions posted over the last couple of
> days were somewhat clear, but then I stopped and asked who really
> holds the legal rights to OpenSSL and who makes the decisions on
> what is correct and what is not.
>
> Ken
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
