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

Re: Bug#523093: undetermined copyright/license violation

[I hope I managed to figure out who I should include in the Cc:

On Thu, 09 Apr 2009 16:58:07 -0400 Hubert Figuiere wrote:

> On 04/09/2009 03:57 PM, Robert Millan wrote:
> >> If you add new function to a LGPL file, and your changes are GPL only,
> >> >  *practically*  the file is only GPL, but the original code is still LGPL,
> >> >  so better to explicit write also the LGPL.
> >
> > Sounds reasonable.  Hubert, can we do that?  Let me know if I can help.
> >
> Given that the original code is in a different language, I don't see 
> where this even make sense.

I think the clean way is adding a note that explicitly states that the
file is a (possibly modified) translation into <programming_language_2>
of code originally written in <programming_language_1> and that the
original code is

  Copyright © <years> <original_copyright_holder>


Then the note would explicitly state that the translation (and the
modifications, if any) are

  Copyright © <years> <your_name>


I hope I clarified what mean.
Mind you, this is just what I would do, and my usual disclaimers apply:

 New location for my website! Update your bookmarks!
..................................................... Francesco Poli .
 GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12  31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4

Attachment: pgpo1dsGYds0o.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: