[nanomsg] Re: MIT Licensing
- From: Martin Sustrik <sustrik@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: nanomsg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 31 May 2014 06:46:58 +0200
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 30/05/14 23:12, zerotacg wrote:
> I see, so basically you state somewhere that we can agree to the
> license by adding the "magic words" "Signed off ..." in the commit
> log kind of
Yes. The nice thing is that that way the agreement is directly in the
git repository.
> btw when cloning the repo we also clone the copyright/license
> notice and rehost it on github. wouldn't that make the clone also
> the same license?
Obviously. When you clone it, it's the same code after all.
> I mean if we fork and don't explicitly delete the license the fork
> has a note stating it is under license xyz?
Once you modify the clone, the things get blurry. I am not a lawyer,
but MIT is not "viral" like GPL, so the modification is not
necessarily licensed under MIT. Once you share it though, it may be
that the license in the header applies. It would require an IP lawyer
to confirm that and even then it's probably a grey zone with no much
precedent.
Anyway, we are not trying to create a bullet-proof system here. That
would require each contributor to visit a notary to tie their
real-world identity to their online identity and public key,
cryptographically signing the patches etc.
What we are rather trying to achieve here is to make people honestly
think about whether the patch is OK from IP point of view. For example:
1. If the patch was written on your employer's time, does the employer
own the copyright? Is he OK with publishing the patch under MIT?
2. Have you taken pieces of code from elsewhere? Were they published
with a MIT-compatible license?
Etc.
So, in the end, all you need is a check box saying "the patch is OK
from the IP point of view".
Currently it's just people saying "I am submitting the patch under MIT
license". We may change that to git commit -s though if everyone is
happy with that.
Martin
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTiV7CAAoJENTpVjxCNN9Y5e4H/1oxk4+jErL+3xu9jNY4PaIo
sh05vZZPrBVnrwVXlffM/yczeAkjvh/bswflXdknnOVN8r7C5d3DVOZHE2x5hwUG
wx/VzmLdbW5GiwVTLwKMZRMvf/KHRhM9K3wyZ+DaNL+iUwA+74hm4/oBXJ3zAVT8
tH1htf2Iq4y/DJhFAVSIDpFaqvcS4j3hMOnNoZYw0Iz9aLxaMpWUasew99cpSIuw
4NpxY2lgB9x17+gQRyn4YWnqJZXoUtpoRouk8tC349+9TFtZF/smyMVxmSqIkwCd
Y3D+wlUKYQUoE9KVHhbBYRIwDlJbolP7l4vWwSk4mkHmXa7zx/IF7z2ZSo0dS08=
=4Hz9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Other related posts:
