On Mon, 2022-10-31 at 06:31 -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 01:21:45PM +0000, Chuck Lever III wrote: > > I know you are Not A Lawyer (tm), but: > > > > The e-mail address in the copyright notice is stale. Is the convention > > to leave stale e-mail addresses in place? > > > > So I would expect copyright ownership of this code to go to Primary Data, > > Jeff's employer at the time. But they don't exist now either; it might > > be difficult to get permission from them to alter this notice. > > I'm not a copyright lawyer, but I've talked to a few, so: > > - first, does Jeff own the copyright for this code, or his employer at > the time? > - if he owns it, can cna do pretty much whatever he wants > - if he doesn't, I would not touch it without approval from the > copyright holder, which gets a little complicated for a company > that doesn't exist in that form any more. I went back and looked at the PD employment contract and I think I may not own the copyright here. There was no explicit carveout for open- source contributions (like I have at RH). In light of that, I guess we should drop this patch and replace it with one that just adds the SPDX header. -- Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>
