On 22 Sep 2007 11:12:56 -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>>> "TL" == Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > TL> I cannot speak for other peoples spec files and I suspect some > TL> packagers won't agree with the "SPEC files are public domain" > TL> statement (disclaimer: IANALY) At least under US copyright law, it isn't at all clear that spec files are copyrightable. When there are very few (or effectively one) way of expressing a particular idea, courts typically will find that there is no copyright protection for the expression(s) of the idea. This is known as 'merger doctrine', since the idea is said to be 'merged' with the expression of the idea. I'd suggest that most specfiles probably are like this- there are only so many ways to list which files need to be packaged, what the deps are, etc., and they mostly derive from known facts rather than creative choice on the part of the specfile author. (Dag, who obviously knows a hell of a lot more about specfiles than I do, seems to agree with me, but YMMV.) That said, it wouldn't hurt for Fedora to expressly note that they think that specfiles are not copyrighted/copyrightable, so that there is no confusion. Luis (again, disclaimer: IANALY) _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
