Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 13:44:52 -0600 From: Chad Perrin <perrin@apotheon.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Why Clang Message-ID: <20120621180200.GA575@hemlock.hydra> In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206210023450.1403@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> References: <4FE1BD0E.5060300@pukruppa.de> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206201416540.24484@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <CA%2B0MdpOftiWE%2B1Gqn5USxu87RPB_7WAGTXnOGU0dp99CMXMYTw@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206201644190.1476@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <CAJ5UdcOwD-gpw548fkHnuzUp3R%2BwTOPvna5Z8J079T4VVKGB=A@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206202204520.3174@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <20120620224030.1a0dc3b4.freebsd@edvax.de> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206202353080.1403@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <20120621001809.da9ce415.freebsd@edvax.de> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206210023450.1403@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 12:25:22AM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> >You're being paid to write a program for a customer. You
>
> i don't talk that case, but if i am hired to write some part of
> program as an employer in software company.
There are basically four circumstances that might apply here, as far as
I'm aware:
1. Your work is considered "work for hire", where you are just a cog in
the corporate machine and the corporation is the "creator" or "author" of
record (and thus the default copyright holder). This means you would
have to get permission ("license") to use the work outside of your
function as an employee.
2. Your work can be used by the employer under exclusive license, which
means you cannot use the work yourself except under strictly limited
conditions specified in law.
3. Your work can be transfered to the employer, so that though you are
the default copyright holder an agreement (possibly an employment
agreement, but generally requiring a distinct agreement separate from the
employment agreement itself for this case) establishes the legal transfer
of copyright from you to the employer.
4. Your work is provided to the employer under a non-exclusive license,
which means you can then license it to others as well.
By far the most common case for a standard employment relationship is
case 1.
Pathological edge-cases may adjust these circumstances. My assumptions
in writing this are based on my experience with US copyright law. I am
not a lawyer, and this does not constitute legal advice, but only an
explanation of my understanding and perspective with regard to copyright
law.
> >
> >BUT - as everyone is free to obtain, modify and re-issue GPL
> >source code, I'm not sure such a consensus could be reached.
>
> by creating a BSD licenced fork - constructed from parts written by
> all developers that - as you said - have personal right to their
> code.
This is pretty much exactly what happened with the Pentadactyl extension
for Firefox. The people who had been doing the majority of development
work for the Vimperator extension for a while, but were not the project
"owner", took the code they had created and rewrote (from scratch) any
additional code needed to make it work, creating the Pentadactyl project.
The original Vimperator project used a copyleft license (the GPL), and
the new Pentadactyl project used a copyfree license (I don't recall
which, probably either the Simplified BSD License or the MIT/X11
License).
--
Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120621180200.GA575>