You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
Repository navigation
Joyent Copyright still in header of many files #3926
Getting an official legal position is good but in general, no existing copyright statement should be altered without the consent of the copyright holder or such alteration is acceptable within the terms of the license. For instance, when io.js originally removed the copyright statements from the individual files and into the main LICENSE file, that was ok because the terms of open source license were still being upheld.
To re-iterate what @jasnell is saying: we can't do anything that materially changes or represents a material change of prior copyright assignment. If we changed this all to say "all prior code is owned by Mikeal Rogers" that would not actually assign anything to me, copyright law doesn't allow us to unilaterally re-assign someone else's copyright, and for compliance purposes we can't state something about the state of the copyright that is not accurate.
Consolidation where possible is fine. Just keep in mind that some
copyrights and licenses may include a requirement to keep the copyright and
license statement in the source file. I don't believe that's the case with
any of our existing cases but it's worth keeping in mind
On Nov 20, 2015 12:38 PM, "Myles Borins" notifications@github.com wrote:
I'm fine with removing the copyright boilerplate in tools/check-imports.sh, lib/v8.js, tools/rpm/node.spec and tools/rpm/rpmbuild.sh. The latter three are (c) StrongLoop but I'm their primary author. Are there other files?
I'm not sure why I added that commit to that PR but the commit log suggests they were leftovers from 3e1b1dd. Probably a regex that wasn't rigorous enough.
Activity
cjihrig commentedon Nov 19, 2015
Those can probably go, but I'm not a lawyer. Also, see 3e1b1dd
MylesBorins commentedon Nov 19, 2015
maybe @mikeal could chime in on what is proper
@isaacs was there a reason some files still maintain the copyright header?
rvagg commentedon Nov 19, 2015
see also #527 / 767ee73 and /cc @bnoordhuis for further context
MylesBorins commentedon Nov 19, 2015
So it would appear there are a handful of copyrights still active in the code base (not just dependencies). Owners of these include
It would appear the joyent copyright is present in LICENSE, which seems to be a central place for keeping project licenses
There is also a stray license file in tools/doc --> https://github.com/nodejs/node/blob/master/tools/doc/LICENSE
indutny commentedon Nov 19, 2015
You have my written permission to remove any of my copyrights, just CC me in a Pull Request.
mikeal commentedon Nov 20, 2015
We'll need a legal opinion on this prior to altering it. I can bring it to the next board meeting if the CTC requests it.
Fishrock123 commentedon Nov 20, 2015
Yes please.
jasnell commentedon Nov 20, 2015
Getting an official legal position is good but in general, no existing copyright statement should be altered without the consent of the copyright holder or such alteration is acceptable within the terms of the license. For instance, when io.js originally removed the copyright statements from the individual files and into the main LICENSE file, that was ok because the terms of open source license were still being upheld.
mikeal commentedon Nov 20, 2015
To re-iterate what @jasnell is saying: we can't do anything that materially changes or represents a material change of prior copyright assignment. If we changed this all to say "all prior code is owned by Mikeal Rogers" that would not actually assign anything to me, copyright law doesn't allow us to unilaterally re-assign someone else's copyright, and for compliance purposes we can't state something about the state of the copyright that is not accurate.
What do we want to change this text to?
Fishrock123 commentedon Nov 20, 2015
I think we just want to consolidate it.
mikeal commentedon Nov 20, 2015
BTW, we may want to start using some compliance tools to figure out where we have gaps in the stated licenses http://www.fossology.org/projects/fossology
MylesBorins commentedon Nov 20, 2015
exactly what @Fishrock123 said. Things seemed inconsistent to me, so I figured it would make sense to have everything living in one place
assuming that is allowed with the license
jasnell commentedon Nov 20, 2015
Consolidation where possible is fine. Just keep in mind that some
copyrights and licenses may include a requirement to keep the copyright and
license statement in the source file. I don't believe that's the case with
any of our existing cases but it's worth keeping in mind
On Nov 20, 2015 12:38 PM, "Myles Borins" notifications@github.com wrote:
bnoordhuis commentedon Nov 21, 2015
I'm fine with removing the copyright boilerplate in
tools/check-imports.sh,lib/v8.js,tools/rpm/node.specandtools/rpm/rpmbuild.sh. The latter three are (c) StrongLoop but I'm their primary author. Are there other files?I'm not sure why I added that commit to that PR but the commit log suggests they were leftovers from 3e1b1dd. Probably a regex that wasn't rigorous enough.
rvagg commentedon Jan 13, 2016
removing
ctc-agenda, using #3979 as a roll-up issue for these.targos commentedon Jan 9, 2017
Moved to nodejs/TSC#174