[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: libkrb53 - odd license term

On Fri, Jun 04, 2004 at 05:24:31PM -0400, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
> >I'm not saying the originating region matters;
> It does somewhat when trying to figure out what a clause is intended to  
> mean. If we saw something like that in a US-based licensor's license,  
> we can be pretty sure it isn't trying to be a copyright assignment,  
> because it can't be.

Why can we be sure of that?  Lots of people try to do things with copyright
that they can't (often because they don't know that).  I don't think that's
a good way to judge what the author intended.

In this case, we're probably best off asking for a clarification from the
author.  (I don't even use Kerberos, so I'm not up to doing that.)

> Also, assume for a moment there is a jurisdiction, FOO, where copyright  
> assignment can be done by non-signed documents. Fred, who lives in FOO,  
> sends me an email with some code and a statement that he assigned the  
> copyright to me. Is the copyright assigned? I'd guess no.

I don't know what happens if you move to FOO, though.

Glenn Maynard

Reply to: