A package I'm reviewing includes the following in a "docs/license" file (I have wrapped the text which was originally on two lines): ========= The !IguanaWorks USB Infrared Transceiver firmware and drivers are provided under the [http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/info/GPLv2.html Gnu Public License (GPL), version 2]. You are free to use the firmware and driver software freely within the constraints of the license. Any changes submitted back to !IguanaWorks become the property of !IguanaWorks and are then licensed to others under the GPL version 2. '''If you submit changes to us, you are giving !IguanaWorks the copyright on those changes.''' If you are interested in commerical use of our hardware or software, please contact us for alternative licensing. ========= I have a few questions regarding this: Is it remotely valid for them to claim copyright without any formal copyright assignment documents being exchanged? I suppose this depends on what "submit" means, but it sure sounds as if they claim that you hand over your copyright just by being friendly and sending a bugfix to them. Does this in any way impact the suitability of this package for Fedora? The firmware mentioned is given in the form of hex code, which doesn't seem to be "the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it." I know the issue of GPL'd binary-only stuff must have come up before; is there a summary of the issue anywhere I can look at? Thanks, - J< _______________________________________________ legal mailing list legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/legal
