[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Bye - Bye , open source derivative works litigation

From: Hyman Rosen
Subject: Re: Bye - Bye , open source derivative works litigation
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2010 14:30:36 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv: Gecko/20091204 Thunderbird/3.0

On 2/11/2010 2:21 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
Why didn't Erik Andersen fork the busybox to create his
> own non-joint version of busybox?

As far as I understand, he made changes to BusyBox to
produce a new version. "Fork" would imply that he was
making a version separate from one undergoing development
by someone else. I do not know the history of BusyBox well
enough to say if this was the case, but I would suspect
that it wasn't.

There is no joint copyright version of BusyBox, so asking
why he did not create his own non-joint version makes an
untrue implication.

They "agree and intend to do so" by posting contributions
> to joint work projects like busybox

They do not. They post contributions to GPL-licensed
programs, and the GPL is the only documentation of
their intent. If the GPL intended to create a joint
work it would say so, and since it does not, no joint
work is created. Indeed, since the GPL spells out that
GPLed work may be distributed only under the GPL, while
joint authorship would allow later authors to distribute
the work otherwise, it is clear that the GPL intends not
to create a joint work.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]