Re: Copyright assignment

[Chris Toshok <toshok hungry com>]

On Mon, 2004-08-09 at 13:13 +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Sul, 2004-08-08 at 23:09, Chris Toshok wrote:
> > But this is not to say I agree with your interpretation at all.  Your
> > submission doesn't include the library, nor should it.  It introduces a
> > dependency on that library, that's all.  The library of course would
> 
> I don't see where it explicitly makes such a statement, and if it does
> then I can submit
> 
> libsmallfiximade.so.1
> 
> and
> 
> 	call_libsmallfiximade()
> 
> as the patch
> 
> so your interpretation doesn't seem to make sense either.

Sure it does.  Unless the source for libsmallfiximade.so.1 is meant to
be included in evolution's source, copyright on it doesn't need to be
assigned.

And if it is meant for inclusion the copyright (and assignment) deals
with the source files that make up libsmallfiximade.so.1, not on the
library itself, so we're back to program code and supporting files.  not
libraries.

Of course you'd be ridiculed by the evolution developers for providing a
fix in the form of a shared library, and most likely your patch would be
refused, but that's beside the point (and mentioned in one of my
previous mails where I said it was completely fixable on the maintainer-
contributor level).

Copyright assignment isn't viral like the GPL.  The only things that
need copyright assigned are the things that are going to end up in the
evolution source.

Chris