Re: libkrb53 - odd license term

[Nathanael Nerode <neroden@twcny.rr.com>]

Glenn Maynard wrote:

>    OpenVision also retains copyright to derivative works of the Source
>    Code, whether created by OpenVision or by a third party.
This sounds completely unacceptable, if it means what it says.  It's also
probably invalid in the US.  Copyright assignments must be signed and on
paper; and OpenVision can't "retain" copyrights it never had in the first
place.

Perhaps it simply means that they retain copyright in their portions, not
that they're stealing your derivative works.  That would require a
statement from the copyright holder before I'd belive it, though.

-- 
There are none so blind as those who will not see.