borismann at gmail.com
Thu Aug 18 14:59:19 UTC 2005
On 18-Aug-05, at 7:32 AM, Earl Dunovant wrote:
> Must be copyright phpBB?
Just going to quote the relevant section, because I skimmed the list
and didn't notice that:
> All original work submitted must be Copyright phpBB Group. We
> cannot and will not accept material submitted under your own
> copyright/s. If you need to include (small sections of) copyrighted
> third party material licenced under the LGPL or GPL you may of
> course do so but must include an appropriate copyright. You must
> not include any non-L/GPL material in your contribution. We will
> refuse any contributions containing third party material which fail
> to recognise that material. Unless fundamentally required and
> agreed with by us your contributions should be largely your own
> work and not that of others (irrespective of including appropriate
> copyright notices).
I just want to point out that this is a very common thing. If the
copyright is not assigned to a single entity (remember, copyright =!
licensing, which is still GPL), then it becomes very difficult to
take legal action.
Example being, only the copyright owner can sue. If someone violated
the GPL on Drupal, who would sue? Everyone that has ever committed
something. This is one of the very good reasons for a project to form
a foundation and ensure that copyright is assigned to that entity.
> On 8/18/05, Dries Buytaert <dries at buytaert.net> wrote:
More information about the drupal-devel