[rules-dev] [rules-users] copyright violation issue on Drools
Mark Proctor
mproctor at codehaus.org
Wed Sep 1 06:08:14 EDT 2010
On 01/09/2010 11:01, Yusuke Yamamoto wrote:
> Now I'm not requesting to change the license retroactively.
> It's okay to keep including my work in the released versions.
> As the copyright holder, and the originator of the work, I'm just
> declaring that my work will no longer licensed under the ASL in the
> future versions.
> AFAIK, the copyright holder can change the license in the future release.
> Like oracle changed the license of WebLogic Server from BEA's license
> to OTN license.
That is not how it works, end of discussion.
Mark
>
>> Any further discussions should take place between legally qualified
>> people.
> Please have Richard respond to me faithfully. Otherwise I need to
> request here.
>
> Thanks,
> Yusuke
>
> On Sep 1, 2010, at 6:40 PM, Mark Proctor wrote:
>
>> On 01/09/2010 10:16, Yusuke Yamamoto wrote:
>>>> No that is not the way that OSS licensing works. You as the
>>>> copyright holder may release future versions of code you hold the
>>>> copyright for under different licenses. You cannot retro-actively
>>>> change the license of something.
>>> Yeah, you're right on that part.
>>>
>>> Red Hat shouldn't be the copyright holder since it's done by my
>>> spare time. There's no term in the employment agreement that enables
>>> Red Hat to grab copyright ownership of employee's work done by
>>> unpaid hours.
>>> You are confusing copyright, go seek legal council - maybe Richard?
>>>
>>> And as the copyright holder, I do not wish to release my work under
>>> the ASL in the future.
>>> So please remove them from the trunk and do not include in the
>>> future versions.
>> Either you are incredibly stupid, or just playing dumb to annoy
>> everyone and waste people's time. I don't think myself or others
>> could have been any clearer. You cannot retroactive unlicense
>> something. That code which you have contributed is under the terms of
>> the ASL, FOREVER, you cannot change that. Under the terms of the ASL
>> we can modify it and distribute and make derivitives from it in
>> further versions FOREVER.
>>
>> I have made that clear, your code will not be removed, this matter is
>> closed and you will achieve nothing more in discussing this further
>> here. Any further discussions should take place between legally
>> qualified people.
>>
>> Now grow up and stop embarassing yourself.
>>
>> Mark
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Yusuke
>>>
>>> On Sep 1, 2010, at 4:22 PM, Mark Proctor wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 01/09/2010 02:50, 山本 裕介 wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> At the time of your contributions to Drools and other
>>>>>> projects you were a Red Hat employee. The Red Hat legal
>>>>>> department has determined that it has the right to copy,
>>>>>> modify and distribute your contributions under the Apache
>>>>>> License version 2.0 and considers this matter closed.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Richard didn't explain that.
>>>>> I didn't use Red Hat time to fix those bugs, translate message
>>>>> resources. I believe that "I am/was a Red Hat employee" doesn't
>>>>> matter. I'm not paid for the task.
>>>>>
>>>>> "At the time the code was contributed in good faith under the
>>>>> Apache license, you cannot then decide at a later date to change
>>>>> your mind."
>>>>> My understanding is that people just do not want to undone their
>>>>> contributions usually. That is how OSS works.
>>>>> Technically the copyright holder of translated message resources,
>>>>> program codes is the originator.
>>>>> I agreed to distribute my work under the ASL, but I didn't tell
>>>>> that I willingly give away the copyright to the project.
>>>>> Anybody who originates their work (i.e. the copyright holder)
>>>>> should be able to decide the license at a later date.
>>>> No that is not the way that OSS licensing works. You as the
>>>> copyright holder may release future versions of code you hold the
>>>> copyright for under different licenses. You cannot retro-actively
>>>> change the license of something.
>>>>
>>>> Imagine I release a project under ASL, I get a million users. I
>>>> then change my mind and revoke that and tell those million users,
>>>> you can't use that under OSS anymore as i've changed my mind, if
>>>> you want to use it pay me 10 billion dollars.
>>>>
>>>> You are confusing copyright and licensing, go seek legal council.
>>>>
>>>> Mark
>>>>>
>>>>> Richard, any comment?
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sep 1, 2010, at 8:27 AM, Michael Neale wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> So is the reason that there is a dispute over another copyright
>>>>>> holder? (ie these changes were copied in violation of that
>>>>>> copyright in the first place) - or a case of changing-minds about
>>>>>> rights to the commits of the original work? (if the latter then
>>>>>> close the issue - nothing can or should be done - as it is a
>>>>>> licencing issue then, not a copyright issue, and as Mark says the
>>>>>> licence doesn't permit that revoking).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 7:56 AM, Mark Proctor
>>>>>> <mproctor at codehaus.org <mailto:mproctor at codehaus.org>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yusuke,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> At the time of your contributions to Drools and other
>>>>>> projects you were a Red Hat employee. The Red Hat legal
>>>>>> department has determined that it has the right to copy,
>>>>>> modify and distribute your contributions under the Apache
>>>>>> License version 2.0 and considers this matter closed. If you
>>>>>> have any further need to discuss this please do so with Red
>>>>>> Hat legal, - you have their contact details.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Even if you were not a Red Hat employee, which you were at
>>>>>> the time, you cannot undo an OSS code contribution, that is
>>>>>> not how OSS licensing works. At the time the code was
>>>>>> contributed in good faith under the Apache license, you
>>>>>> cannot then decide at a later date to change your mind. The
>>>>>> OSS licenses, be it ASL or LGPL or GPL, are designed
>>>>>> specifically to provide certainty in that area. Without this
>>>>>> level of certainty end user OSS adoption would be a minefield
>>>>>> as every time developers fall out, which happens often, one
>>>>>> could demand all their code be removed and this would impact
>>>>>> everyone who has invested time installing that software in
>>>>>> production systems.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mark
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 31/08/2010 17:41, 山本 裕介 wrote:
>>>>>>> I have consulted RH legal dept. only to get no meaningful
>>>>>>> response.
>>>>>>> I guess Edson is the one who commit most of these files.
>>>>>>> The how and why they need to be uncommitted is attached to
>>>>>>> the Jira issue.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Yusuke
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sep 1, 2010, at 1:34 AM, Mauricio Salatino wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Yusuke, good question. I'm not sure where is the right
>>>>>>>> place, but you are only asking to rollback your changes right?
>>>>>>>> who commit all your contributions to the jboss repo?
>>>>>>>> I also saw that you mention: "For several reasons, I
>>>>>>>> decided to withdraw those contributions introduced from my
>>>>>>>> spare time. "
>>>>>>>> can you mention those reasons? so we, as community can
>>>>>>>> learn why you want to remove your contributions. I'm just
>>>>>>>> curious.
>>>>>>>> Greetings.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 12:50 PM, 山本 裕介
>>>>>>>> <yamamoyu at gmail.com <mailto:yamamoyu at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Where is the appropriate forum for copyright issues?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sep 1, 2010, at 12:45 AM, Greg Barton wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > This is not the appropriate forum for copyrighgt issues.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > GreG
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > On Aug 31, 2010, at 9:40, 山本 裕介
>>>>>>>> <yamamoyu at gmail.com <mailto:yamamoyu at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > Hi,
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > There's a copyright violation issue on Drools 5.1
>>>>>>>> release.
>>>>>>>> > Please remove the changes listed in the following issue.
>>>>>>>> > https://jira.jboss.org/browse/JBRULES-2660
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > Thanks,
>>>>>>>> > Yusuke
>>>>>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> > rules-users mailing list
>>>>>>>> > rules-users at lists.jboss.org
>>>>>>>> <mailto:rules-users at lists.jboss.org>
>>>>>>>> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> > rules-users mailing list
>>>>>>>> > rules-users at lists.jboss.org
>>>>>>>> <mailto:rules-users at lists.jboss.org>
>>>>>>>> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> rules-users mailing list
>>>>>>>> rules-users at lists.jboss.org
>>>>>>>> <mailto:rules-users at lists.jboss.org>
>>>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com <http://www.plugtree.com/>
>>>>>>>> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
>>>>>>>> <http://salaboy.wordpress.com/>
>>>>>>>> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>>>>>>>> <http://www.jbug.com.ar/>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> rules-users mailing list
>>>>>>>> rules-users at lists.jboss.org
>>>>>>>> <mailto:rules-users at lists.jboss.org>
>>>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> rules-users mailing list
>>>>>>> rules-users at lists.jboss.org <mailto:rules-users at lists.jboss.org>
>>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> rules-dev mailing list
>>>>>> rules-dev at lists.jboss.org <mailto:rules-dev at lists.jboss.org>
>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Michael D Neale
>>>>>> home: www.michaelneale.net <http://www.michaelneale.net/>
>>>>>> blog: michaelneale.blogspot.com <http://michaelneale.blogspot.com/>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> rules-dev mailing list
>>>>>> rules-dev at lists.jboss.org <mailto:rules-dev at lists.jboss.org>
>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> rules-dev mailing list
>>>>> rules-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> rules-dev mailing list
>>>> rules-dev at lists.jboss.org <mailto:rules-dev at lists.jboss.org>
>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> rules-dev mailing list
>>> rules-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rules-dev mailing list
>> rules-dev at lists.jboss.org <mailto:rules-dev at lists.jboss.org>
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-dev mailing list
> rules-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/rules-dev/attachments/20100901/2e74e9ad/attachment-0001.html
More information about the rules-dev
mailing list