> On Oct 31, 2022, at 9:48 AM, Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > 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. OK. I can cobble one up. -- Chuck Lever
