Thanks for the clarification On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 5:07 AM, Monty Taylor <mord...@inaugust.com> wrote:
> On 01/17/2015 03:27 AM, ZhiQiang Fan wrote: > > Hi, developers > > > > I have observed that some source code files in our projects have been > > announced as "Copyright xxx, All rights reserved", and then followed by a > > "Apache License" > > > > Is this right? any conflict? > > > > And if one company claims that it reserves all rights for some source > > files, those source files may have already created by or will be > > maintained by several companies, then what about the others? > > > > Maybe a stupid question, but will be very appreciated if there is any > > clarification. > > It's actually a set of words that is no longer necessary as of the year > 2000. It's not communicating anything about a granted license, which is > what the Apache License does - it's actually just asserting that the > original copyright holder asserts that they have not waived any of their > rights as a copyright holder. However, the Berne convention grants this > automatically without a positive assertion. > > In short - the words "All rights reserved" neither help or harm anything. > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
