On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 09:56:10PM +0000, Bart Martens wrote: > It's what happens in practice when I submit a patch upstream and don't say > anything about my copyright. Upstream integrates the patch in the upstream > source code and redistributes the result with upstream copyright and license. > I think that this happens quite a lot. As mentioned already in this thread (by Russ, I think), the declared copyright owner(s) and the actual, legally valid, copyright owner(s) of a given contribution are not necessarily the same. In fact, chasing who are the real copyright owner(s) is a significant part of copyright litigations, including GPL enforcements. I know a couple of DDs who have professionally worked on this kind of activities. I can put you in touch with them if you want to know more about how, in practice, one find outs who the real copyright owners are. But the basics are what we can all imagine: inspecting VCS histories, patch submission to public mailing lists and bug trackers, etc. Cheers. -- Stefano Zacchiroli . . . . . . . zack@upsilon.cc . . . . o . . . o . o Maître de conférences . . . . . http://upsilon.cc/zack . . . o . . . o o Debian Project Leader . . . . . . @zack on identi.ca . . o o o . . . o . « the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature