Proprietary software for Linux

[David Starner]

On Tue, Nov 30, 1999 at 07:37:28PM -0800, Mark Wells wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Nov 1999, David Starner wrote:
> 
> > I don't believe you assign your rights to the copyright holder unless you have
> > a contract that says that. On one extreme a patch that fixes a simple
> 
> If that's the case, then my patch that fixes a typo is mine even after it
> gets folded into the source tree,
There's a rule, that goes something like, "if it's obvious, and there's only
a one way to do it, then there's no copyright interest." Or something like that.

> Anyway, transfers of copyright don't require a formal
> contract--work-for-hire is an obvious counterexample.
But work for hire is a contract, and is mentioned by name in the statues, IIRC.

> > The FSF demands copyright transfers to solve part of this problem for their 
> > program. OTOH, they also give a contract that gives you the right to sue
> > them for taking a program proprietary, too.
> 
> That's the implied contract I was talking about: 
But it's not implied. You sign a written contract for the FSF that includes
that in it, with due consideration (the FSF promises you a buck.) It's 
legally impecabble, and hence not interesting when discussing the fine
lines.

IANAL.
-- 
David Starner - dstarner98 at aasaa.ofe.org
I see no trend at all, except toward women playing mean and ugly 
sociopaths who are good at killing and who enjoy dark powers. Maybe 
it's just my friends?
	-- Dr. Kromm, on who plays what type of character in RPGs