On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 16:52:19 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 05:45:15PM +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 15:57:31 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > > > > Saying things like: > > > > > > "and arbitrary other people, who get their patch contributions merged, > > > don't gain any copyright protection on the file or the proper parts of > > > it," > > > > > > is inaccurate and dangerous. It's entirely appropriate to indicate that > > > it's untrue. > > > > I wrote that in the context of files giving credit to *some* people [*], > > which could (!) be an indication that any _unknown_ changes, which other > > people may have managed to get included in those files, likely have not > > been considered substantial enough to qualify for copyright. > > Which is a dangerous position to take. Don't say things like that. I'd love to take advice from you, but with your overly brief comments you're unconvincing. I don't think copyright law is as simple as to cover it with one-line mails. -- Fedora release 17 (Beefy Miracle) - Linux 3.4.4-5.fc17.x86_64 loadavg: 0.54 0.68 0.55 -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
