On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 02:36:58PM +0200, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote: > > Also, author doesn't necessarily mean copyright owner, company > > affiliation also does not necessarily mean copyright is with the company > > (it depends on the work contract) and it would require a lot more > > research to find the true copyright owner. > > > > The copyright statements also have other relevant information, such as > > years. This is relevant to find out which copyright laws were in effect > > when the code was published. > > hmm, maybe we should start w/ introducing some rules for that for all > new code ? > > Maybe: > > Rule 1: If not stated otherwise, the Signed-Off-By indicates the signer > claims copyright for the added or replaced lines of code. > This only affect any lines of code that were already present > (and unchanged) before these rules taking effect. > Rule 2: New files shall have some SPDX-Copyright: header (checkpatch > should check for that). > Rule 3: If the SPDX-Copyright header is present, all mentioned authors > claim copyright for the whole file, except for claims from other > rules. > Rule 4: For existing files, SPDX-Copyright header may be added on a per- > case basis, when actual copyright claims have been validated. > Rule 5: If the author is transferring his claims to some company, this > company shall be mentioned in the Signed-Off-By or SPDX- > Copyright headers. > > Certainly, it will take a long time, until everything is really cleared > up, but IMHO a good start, at least for all new code. That's crazy, again, if people want to talk about SPDX-Copyright or anything like that, please bring it up on the SPDX mailing list, not this one, as that's not what this list is for (it is for applying the _existing_ SPDX _LICENSE_ tags to the kernel source tree>0 thanks, greg k-h
