Re: FW: Re: Proprietary Modules and GPL API (from postnuke devel list)

I messed up folks. I humbly apologize for any mess I may have caused 
on the PostNuke and Xaraya Lists. I need to find out who Paul of 
paul-X357vOeSiW/Y2nr59tdtLgC/[email protected] is. I assumed he was Paul Rosania. Like they 
say, to assume is to make an Ass out of U and Me... in this case me.

I promise to use WHOIS in the future!

====================================================
Gregory Remington | Marketing R&D | http://pnapi.com
====================================================

Gregor J. Rothfuss writes:

> hint:
> http://www.xaraya.com/newsgroups/article.php?
id=76&group=xaraya.curiosa
> 
> is NOT paul rosania, as you asserted. would you mind to
> clear up the mess, and respond to hz on pndev.
> 
> there is a follow up post that explains the stance of xaraya.

Oops. Which paul is it then? I was going by a xaraya dev list posted by
someone else. Is there a Xaraya dev list available that associates 
nicks
and real names? I'll compile one if not.

I'll be happy to clear up the mess... we're all human ;)

====================================================
Gregory Remington | Marketing R&D | http://pnapi.com
====================================================


> 
> > The only way for us to get
> > postnuke to the lgpl level would be to completely rewrite all the 
code
> from
> > scratch or to get every person who has ever worked on the code 
base to
> give
> > over their right to the gpl to a single party.
> 
> Not necessarily true. Only the code currently in use needs to be 
considered.
> Also keep in mind that this is the decision of the copyright owner, 
the GNU
> GPL is just a license between the copyright owner and another 
entity, so
> whoever owns the copyright to the code gets to decide on the license.
> 
> In a collaborative environment people get confused over who is the 
copyright
> holder of what, but it gets easier when you look into copyright law. 
For a
> work to be copyrightable it must be significant and original 
expression -
> i.e. a three line function I come up with isn't copyrightable, nor 
is a soup
> recipe; however a recipe collection (or complete program) is. This 
already
> significantly cuts the chaff of who can claim a thumb in the pie. In 
the
> case of works made for hire, the employer and not the employee is 
considered
> to be the author. Included in the definition of a "work made for 
hire" is:
> "a work specially ordered or commissioned for use as:
>     a contribution to a collective work
>     a translation
>     a supplementary work"
> 
> Basically if there really is a legal entity known as "Post Nuke" 
whoever
> they may be are the copyright owners of the vast majority of the 
codebase.
> (On the other hand, if there isn't an actual legal entity 
called "Post Nuke"
> then everything you guys have done have basically been donated to 
the public
> domain.)
> 
> See:
> http://www.loc.gov/copyright/circs/circ1.html
> http://www.ksu.edu/academicservices/intprop/webtutor/tsld002.htm
> http://www.intelproplaw.com/
> with many links at http://www.intelproplaw.com/Copyright/
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xaraya_curiosa mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.xaraya.com/mailman/listinfo/xaraya_curiosa