Re: request-tracker3: license shadiness
On Wed, Jul 07, 2004 at 06:09:19PM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
> Branden> Right; but it remains true even if someone steals your
> Branden> modifications, corrections or extensions to the work off
> Branden> your computer and submits them to Best Practical
> Branden> Solutions, LLC. The license places no restrictions on
> Branden> who performs the act of submission, or under what
> Branden> circumstances the submission is made.
> I don't think a court would see it that way. I agree that the license
> would be better if clarified to say that in submitting a patch, you
> assert that you have the necessary intelectual property rights and
> that you assign those rights to Best Practical, or to in some other
> way make it more clear.
> I'd like to ask you to support your claim that a court would hold that
> work stolen from you and contributed to Best Practical would be owned
> by Best Practical under this license. Can you cite any cases where
> similar things have happened?
> Especially under US copyright law, this interpretation seems unlikely.
> As has been discussed previously on this list, a copyright assignment
> requires a written statement from the copyright holder. I personally
> believe that as it stands the clause of the RT license that would
> automatically transfer copyright is unenforceable.
It seems to me that the more likely outcome in this event would be a
conclusion either that the license is altogether invalid, or that anyone
having made modifications to RT3 has failed to comply with the license,
resulting in a finding that anyone making modifications is infringing Best
Practical's copyright.
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
Reply to: