2014-02-13 0:38 GMT+08:00 Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 12:26:35AM +0800, Barry Song wrote: >> > Well, your 2012 change doesn't seem to be "significant" to warrent a >> > normal copyright update, but the update is usually "less strict" than an >> > original mark, so that might be ok, now that I review these closer. >> > >> > But I'd still prefer to get the opinion of your lawyer about this. >> >> Greg, thanks. i will ask csr lawyer to give some feedback if i can :-) >> >> i am not an expert of copyright and i am really ignorant on it. in my >> shallow understand, it seems it is difficult to evaluate what is >> "significant" and what is not important as it highly depends on the >> personal opinion? is this something like "there are a thousand Hamlets >> in a thousand people's eyes"? > > It does "depend", but the "general" rule that most everyone follows, and > what I have been advised to stick to, is "1/3 of the file is > modified/added to" by a company/developer. If that happens, then a > copyright mark is allowed. That has worked well over the many years of > me having to deal with this, but the issue of "extending" the mark > hasn't really been discussed, so I don't know if that same rule applies > here or not. > > Feedback from your lawyer would be great to have on this, thanks. > Greg, i am inviting our lawyer Cherrie into this, as she is maybe busy, so we might wait some time. > greg k-h -barry -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-serial" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
