[dev] Copyright questions

[Bernhard Redl]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-howto.html
> You should also include a copy of the license itself somewhere in
> the distribution of your program. All programs, whether they are
> released under the GPL or LGPL, should include the text version of
> the GPL <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.txt>. In GNU programs the
> license is usually in a file called COPYING.
i think linking will be dangerous.

On 08/10/2011 08:17 PM, Michael M Slusarz wrote:
> Quoting Michael J Rubinsky <mrubinsk at horde.org>:
>
>> Quoting Ralf Lang <lang at b1-systems.de>:
>>
>>> Am Mittwoch, 27. Juli 2011, 11:50:44 schrieb Gunnar Wrobel:
>>>> Hi!
>>>>
>>>> I was wondering a bit about the way we mention copyright in our
>>>> code.
>>>>
>>>> We do have copyright notices in most of our files, sometimes PHP
>>>> doclinks as well. and some packages (the applications) offer
>>>> COPYING/LICENSE.
>>>>
>>>> The copyright statement in the code files usually mention the
>>>> COPYING/LICENSE file that should come with the package. For the
>>>> framework components its is usually not present though.
>>>>
>>>> And I don't even know if having such copyright statements in the
>>>> code
>>>> is actually needed. I once read that the COPYING/LICENSE file in a
>>>> package would be enough. The maintenance effort of having maybe only
>>>> two or three links to copyright information would be much lower.
>>>>
>>>> So I wonder a bit if we can improve the situation. It is at least
>>>> somewhat confusing to me at the moment and if possible I would
>>>> like to
>>>> get it simpler. Does anybody know what requirements we actually
>>>> see/have in that area? I'm willing to invest a bit of time to
>>>> find out
>>>> what kind of legal requirements exist but maybe somebody already
>>>> knows.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>> Gunnar
>>>
>>> As nobody else jumped on this:
>>>
>>> I'm really in favor of changing the license headers in the files to:
>>>
>>> * Copyright 1999-2011 The Horde Project (http://www.horde.org/)
>>> *
>>> * See the enclosed file COPYING for license information (LGPL). If
>>> you did
>>> * not receive this file, see
>>> http://opensource.org/licenses/lgpl-2.1.php
>>>
>>> into
>>>
>>> * Copyright 1999-2011 The Horde Project (http://www.horde.org/)
>>> *
>>> * See http://opensource.org/licenses/lgpl-2.1.php
>>> * for license information (LGPL)
>>>
>>> and dropping the shipped files. As long as the law-savvy agree...
>>
>> Sounds good to me, though I'm not law-savvy. Though we should
>> change the copyright holder to the LLC while we are making these
>> changes.
>
> The idea is that you can't guarantee a URL will be accessible in the
> future - thus, the need for distribution of the license in the package.
>
> On the flip side, you can make the argument that no reasonable
> person would not understand what the LGPL is.
>
> Either way, it makes more sense to link to a URL that we control.
> We can always make that URL redirect to an outside site, but it
> gives us control to make sure the license is always correctly
> available.
>
> michael
>
> ___________________________________
> Michael Slusarz [slusarz at horde.org]
>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk5C0fYACgkQ9wU+3S/MK7ToFwCgh33lG9VrmVN40rRTN3J69ZBu
8BMAnRCFvwy1i8xJTkK/7LbNM+CNsBvs
=GK9/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----