RE: Copyright [cgf, please comment]

[Suhaib Siddiqi <ssiddiqi at inspirepharm dot com>]

> I'm not a lawyer either, but I really doubt that your signing 
> a document
> several years ago has any application to my actions :)  
> Really, there is no
> way that your having filled out the copyright assignment form 
> could apply to
> my works.  You'd have to have my power of attorney in order 
> to sign away the
> rights on my works, and last I checked, we haven't made any such
> arrangements :)

I am not signing away your work.  First of all source code is different 
then documents.  The questions I raised because I was asked.  They are
different issues.
If you do not want to change the copyright notice, and RedHat does not allow
me
to keep your copyright as you posted I will delete those documents.
Unfortunately I 
will have no choice.  Because when you use some commercial company server
you
sometimes have to follow their rules.  I did not make arrangements with you
but anyone I grant CVS access I assume that things needs to be checked with
me 
first.  There were certain guidelines were told to me by RedHat when they
decided to
host Cygwin/Xfree86 project and I need to follow those guidelins.  If you
have objections
to transfer copyright, which is fine for me. You have freedom not to do so,
and 
RedHat has freedom to delete the artcile which does not confer to rules
which I agreed
when I was assigned project leadership.

> > > legal mechanism that requires formal paperwork.
> >
> >
> > Red Hat has the right to remove it.  That is what I had been told.
> > RedHat will give you authorship, but copyright you need to discuss
> > with Chris Faylor directly.  If he allows I will leave 
> everyones document
> > as it is.
> 
> We did discuss it with Chris Faylor:
> http://xfree86.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-xfree/2000-q3/msg00459.html

That is why I said if he allows.

> I most definitely do NOT own the copyright on the FAQ located at:
> http://xfree86.cygwin.com/faq.html
> 
> I never claimed to own the copyright on that document, please 
> carefully
> re-read my original statement of which works I own the copyright on.
> 
> The copyright for that page is most likely held by RedHat, 
> through your
> prior arrangements with them.  However, there is no copyright 
> notice on the
> aforementioned page, so a court might declare (in an unlikely 
> event that
> someone would bring the FAQ before a court, lol) that it has 
> become public
> domain :(
> 
> I was very careful to mention that I own the copyright on the 
> Cygwin/XFree86
> FAQ (draft, herein refereed to as 'draft FAQ'), not on the 
> FAQ located at
> the address given above.  

You are confusing Harold :-)
What is adraft?  What is a final document? Why copyright on draft
and why you have not given a diff file against current FAQ so Rob can
work on it.  Am I misunderstanding that you do not want conetnts of 
current FAQ while important in the your draft. Only draft cannot be posted.
Draft is a draft and only final document will be posted which will contain
yours
and everyone contribution.  You need to get things clear at your end please.

Suhaib



>I was very careful to ensure that all of the
> writing in the draft FAQ was my own, as the lack of a license 
> or copyright
> on the original FAQ made me kind of nervous :)  The lack of a 
> license and
> copyright on the original FAQ makes up part of the reason why 
> I did not
> immediately rewrite all of the questions that were present in 
> the original
> FAQ.  I can read a document, and I can write something on a 
> similar topic to
> a document that I have read, but I have to make sure that 
> everything I write
> is distinct from the original document and is written in my own words
> (unless I cite a passage from the original document).
> 
> Trust me, I thought about all of these questions way before I 
> ever started
> writing the draft FAQ.  :)
> 
> > Then do not post please without first clearing with people
> > in-charge of the
> > project.
> > I follow the same Guidelines I do not post something which 
> might raise
> > questions later.
> > In that case I consult with RedHat folks first to clarify and get
> > permission.
> 
> Yup, Chris Faylor already gave his blessing (same link as above):
> http://xfree86.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-xfree/2000-q3/msg00459.html
> 
> > Your rest of the GFDL I leave as it is because I am not a 
> legal expert to
> > answer
> > I know Cygwin and many software are GPL and copyright 
> belong to RedHat and
> > respective companies.
> 
> That is because RedHat, and other companies, want to be able 
> to defend the
> works that they license for other people to use, and they 
> also want to be
> able to distribute those works under less restrictive, or 
> even closed-source
> licenses, as a revenue generating activity.  RedHat has to 
> own the copyright
> on *every* contribution to Cygwin so that they may distribute 
> under other
> licenses.  However, RedHat does not need to own the copyright on my
> documentation, as they will never distribute it under any 
> other license than
> the GNU FDL.  Furthermore, my assigning the copyright on my 
> works to RedHat
> could open them up to litigation, for they would be the ones 
> hauled into
> court if one of my documents was ever accused of breaking 
> someone else's
> copyright.  I'd much rather keep the copyright with myself 
> and bear the
> legal burden on my own :)
> 
> The GNU FDL is to documentation what the GNU GPL is to source code.
> 
> Harold
>