[development] Modules that integrate non-GPL PHP appsviolate the GPL.

[Earnie Boyd]

Quoting Larry Garfield <larry at garfieldtech.com>:

>
> On Fri, 07 Sep 2007 15:34:39 -0400, Earnie Boyd 
> <earnie at users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
>> While a preamble is indeed a good idea the lack thereof doesn't harm
>> the copyright or the license with which the package is distributed.
>> The copyright is owned by the producer of the code and the license
>> allows the copyright holder to give you the right to use it.  It can
>> also be contrived that since I freely gave the code that is covered by
>> my copyright to Drupal that I also transferred the copyright to Drupal.
>
> Not true, unless you explicitly signed a document stating that you 
> transfered copyright ownership to Dries Buytaert.  Unless I missed 
> it, there is no such automatic transfer involved in committing to 
> CVS.  (Some projects do have that, but not Drupal.)
>
> The "GPL means someone else owns my code now" line is a lie.  Period. 
>  They can *use* your code, and can even redistribute it however they 
> want as long as they do so under the GPL, but ownership remains with 
> you until you legally turn it over to someone else.
>

I said that it can be contrived to mean; meaning that some court 
*could* (not would) give Drupal that right.  Copyright law changes with 
each courts interpretation.  FSF forces the issue and makes you and 
everyone else that owns you sign a document for you to contribute code 
that is distributed by the FSF just to make it clear that FSF owns the 
copyright.

Earnie -- http://for-my-kids.com/
-- http://give-me-an-offer.com/