I wrote:
>>> There is another way to go about it. Where copyrights are not
>>> explicitly stated, the Debian project can decide to uniformly make
>>> clear its own copyright upon its own web site, and make a /public
>>> notice /of its intention to do so, along with a call for past
>>> contributors to oppose and ask for their contribution to be removed
>>> before this takes place.
>>>
>>> This can be done in finite time. This is only a clarification of a
>>> copyright that always existed. Anyone, past, present, or future,
>>> who asserts that a never-formally-stated copyright of a portion of
>>> the project's web site exists that is not owned by the project is
>>> just trying to obstruct the project.
>>>
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> The limit of this discussion should be the definition of explicit
> questions to ask our legal counsel about copyright rules.
So, can we please have SPI counsel opine on my theory as presented above?
Regarding the transfer of copyrights to SPI, the holding company concept
is the problem for Debian. Nobody would be so uneasy were the proposal
to transfer the copyrights to the Debian project as its own legal entity.
Thanks
Bruce
_______________________________________________
Spi-general mailing list
Spi-general@lists.spi-inc.org
http://lists.spi-inc.org/listinfo/spi-general
