Re: copyright notice question

On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 2:52 AM Rick Macklem <rmacklem_at_uoguelph.ca> wrote:

> Mehmet Erol Sanliturk wrote:
> >On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 4:04 AM Rick Macklem <rmacklem_at_uoguelph.ca
> <mailto:rmacklem_at_uoguelph.ca>> wrote:
> >>Warner Losh wrote:
> >>>On Mon, Oct 19, 2020, 7:25 PM Rick Macklem <rmacklem_at_uoguelph.ca
> <mailto:rmacklem_at_uoguelph.ca><mailto:rmacklem_at_uoguelph.ca<mailto:
> rmacklem_at_uoguelph.ca>>> wrote:
> >>>>I'll admit I've hesitated to ask this for a long time, but I guess I
> have to;-)
> >>>>I've created two daemons for NFS-over-TLS, using the code in
> >>>>/usr/src/usr.sbin/gssd/gssd.c as a starting point.
> >>>>--> As such, I left the copyright notice from this file on the two
> files.
> >>>>      (As you can see, it is a 2 clause FreeBSD one, so the terms
> aren't
> >>>>       an issue.)
> >>>>
> >>>>What I am wondering is if I should be adding my name to it as an
> >>>>additional author or something like that?
> >>>>(I don't care, but it does seem a little weird that the copyright is
> held
> >>>> by Isilon Inc, since I have no connection to them.)
> >>>
> >>>Likely. If you changed a substantial amount, then yes. The rule of
> thumb is >50%
> >>> is no brainer yes. Smaller percentages require more nuanced judgement
> as to whether the changes are substantial enough to create a new work.
> Chances are
> >>> quite good you fall into one of those categories. Also, if you have
> replaced more
> >>>than ~90% chances are good no original work remains. Again, a judgement
> call.
> >>>There are more technical legal guidelines, but that would require a
> lawyer.
> >>>
> >>>My hunch is that unless this is something far more trivial than I then
> I'd add the
> >>> notice, but retaining the old.
> >>Well, I'd guess it's somewhere in the 50->90% category.
> >>Would just adding a comment below the current copyright notice like:
> >>/*
> >> * Extensively modified from /usr/src/usr.sbin/gssd.c for RPC-over-TLS
> >> * by Rick Macklem.
> >> */
> >>be sufficient for the project, or should I put a second copyright notice
> >>on it with my name on it? (This will seem odd, since it will have the
> same
> >>terms as the extant one, but if that is what is appropriate for the
> project..)
> >>
> >>It is my understanding (I'm obviously not a lawyer, clearly indicated by
> the
> >>size of my bank account;-) that a copyright notice can only be changed by
> >>the holder (or with their express permission), but an additional
> copyright
> >>notice can be attached to the work to cover the re-write.
> >>Is this correct? (All amateur lawyers, feel free to respond;-)
> >>
> >>Thanks for your comments, rick
> >>
> >>>Warnet
> >>
> [copyright comment snipped]
> >My opinion is as follows :
> >
> >At the top of the related sources I would include a message (
> approximately ) as >follows :
>








> I believe for FreeBSD this would need to be after the main copyright
> notice,
> but that is trivial, I think?
>
>
>



A "Copyright owner additions Style Guide" may be prepared by the FreeBSD
Project to make a common application pattern
for such inclusions . A commonly accepted and applied style is the best
over time .






> >After svn ( or git ) modification number(s)  ... ( including )  I have
> made substantial ( or significant ) modifications ( or improvements ) .
> >The copyright of these modifications with the present license listed
> below are >belong to
> >
> >Rick Macklem , starting from date .....
> > (  Rick Macklem  ... an approximately fixed address ... )
> Does anyone know if there are examples of this in other major open
> source projects?
>
> I would be very shy of creating a notice that is not exactly what other
> FreeBSD files have in them. For one thing, is referring to license terms
> in another
> copyright notice "standard practice"?
>
> I'll admit that, unless there are examples of this elsewhere in the FreeBSD
> source tree (or at least in other major open source projects), I would not
> be
> comfortable doing this.
>
> Maybe I'll try asking this question...
> Is there a concern that the copyright notice that is on gssd.c could be
> considered
> "not valid" due to the extensive changes made to the code by me?
> (If the answer to that is "no", then I don't see that anything needs to be
> done,
>  since the notice includes reasonable terms as already used elsewhere in
> FreeBSD.
>  I have no interest in being a copyright holder for this unless the
> copyright can
>  be invalidated.)
> Put another way, "Is there a concern that the extensive changes would
> allow the
> copyright notice be replaced by something like a GPL ?".
>
> rick, who would rather just lease the notice alone
>
>



Please consider zLib License :


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zlib_License
zlib License


Inclusion of such modification information into modified sources is
compulsory .



One point is obvious :

Modifications into a previously copyrighted source ( work ) either does NOT
invalidate the previous copyright of the work or
can NOT  change its license . New additions may be included by a separate
license , for example  GPL , but the new license is applicable only to the
NEW additions .

I will not remember such an example , but , surely I can say that I am
seeing many sources with such modification licenses , because I am
tracking  a large number of software repositories or I am encountering such
sources during my open source software searches .


No one is obliged to accept or use such sources because any one may
use/start original licensed sources .


My suggestion to include SVN ( or GIT ) number(s) is to eliminate searches
to find copyright affected first copy .


>
> Each contributor may append such notifications listed on the topmost part .
> When a person reads such sources , she/he very easily understands its
> modification and copyright status without any doubt .
>
>
>





Mehmet Erol Sanliturk





>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>