Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: [sork] About license of sork modules]

2006-05-01 Thread Don Armstrong
On Mon, 01 May 2006, Chuck Hagenbuch wrote: > I suppose another question is, what level of contribution gives > someone enough copyright say to need to approve a license change? > Fixing a typo? A few lines of code? A whole new driver seems like > enough to me; what about tweaking CSS? I don't kno

Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: [sork] About license of sork modules]

2006-04-30 Thread Chuck Hagenbuch
Quoting Michael Poole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: This probably varies slightly from country to country, but at least in the USA, copyright is not automatically transferred like this. If the work is done "for hire", the employer is the original copyright holder. If a written agreement assigning the s

Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: [sork] About license of sork modules]

2006-04-30 Thread Michael Poole
Gregory Colpart writes: > Chuck, I forward to debian-legal list, best place for license > experts. By the way, cc'ing a closed list when emailing an open list is poor form. (Hopefully this will help others avoid the auto-reject message I got.) Michael Poole -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL

Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: [sork] About license of sork modules]

2006-04-30 Thread Michael Poole
[Cc'ed to original recipients since it seemed likely not all follow debian-legal] Gregory Colpart writes: > Chuck, I forward to debian-legal list, best place for license > experts. > > debian-legal people, find first post of this thread here : > http://lists.horde.org/archives/sork/Week-of-Mon-2

[EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: [sork] About license of sork modules]

2006-04-30 Thread Gregory Colpart
Chuck, I forward to debian-legal list, best place for license experts. debian-legal people, find first post of this thread here : http://lists.horde.org/archives/sork/Week-of-Mon-20060424/002560.html - Forwarded message from Chuck Hagenbuch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 2