Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2013 14:29:26 +0000 From: "Teske, Devin" <Devin.Teske@fisglobal.com> To: Joe <fbsd8@a1poweruser.com> Cc: "<freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org>" <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org>, "<kpneal@pobox.com>" <kpneal@pobox.com> Subject: Re: use of the kernel and licensing Message-ID: <13CA24D6AB415D428143D44749F57D7201EEC4FB@ltcfiswmsgmb21> In-Reply-To: <51583C91.5060000@a1poweruser.com> References: <CAJ%2Bvzi9RZN5F50fCDJBGJ23R2%2BrhAsC10WSt_PMeFhO=WU3UZA@mail.gmail.com> <20130331001209.GA69583@neutralgood.org> <51583C91.5060000@a1poweruser.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mar 31, 2013, at 6:39 AM, Joe <fbsd8@a1poweruser.com> wrote: > kpneal@pobox.com wrote: >> On Sat, Mar 30, 2013 at 09:22:22AM -0400, Maikoda Sutter wrote: >>> If I use the kernel as a basis for my own system and modify the kernel >>> should I still maintain the licensing of the kernel bits, or could rele= ase >>> it under it's own license? >>>=20 >>> For example: I would like to rewrite the headers to be 100% POSIX compl= iant >>> and I do like the BSD license, however I was planning on releasing my w= hole >>> system under the Unlicense, I understand that certain headers and code = that >>> I do not modify has to be released under the BSD license as that is the >>> original license of the code, however for headers or code that I modify= can >>> I release it under the Unlicense (http://unlicense.org/)? >>>=20 >>> I do plan on giving credit where it is due and such to the wonderful >>> developers of FreeBSD and those that wrote the original code because >>> without you I would not be able to produce so rapidly that which I am >>> looking to produce I just would like clarification on the extent that I >>> would have to license things via the BSD license. >> You cannot yourself change the license on code you do not hold the copyr= ight >> on. Period. >> If you make changes and redistribute them then add your copyright notice >> with license to the files. Do not remove the existing copyright notice(s) >> and license(s). >> You hold the copyright for stuff you wrote, but the original copyright >> stays for the parts that did not come from you. "Parts" means any fracti= on >> of a file from the whole file down to small amounts. You are allowed to >> add restrictions (unless the existing license says you can't), but you a= re >> not allowed to loosen the existing restrictions (unless the existing lic= ense >> says you can). Also, it follows from the copyright that your license only >> applies to the parts copyrighted by you. The existing licenses are simi= lar >> in that they apply only to their parts of the file. All licenses must be >> followed when the file is treated (copied, used, etc) as a whole. >> Make sure your license isn't incompatible with the license that applies >> to other parts of the same file. If that happens then how it will turn o= ut >> in court is anyone's guess. The file may not be usable by the public, or >> the incompatible license terms added by you may be struck down, or a jud= ge >> could cook up something else. It can't be predicted in advance so just >> don't even go there. >> "Giving credit where it is due" is an important social convention, and I= 'm >> glad to see that you aren't planning on doing anything unethical like >> breaking it. But copyright comes from the law and thus must be obeyed ev= en >> if you wanted to break purely social conventions. >> Read up on copyright, and when you do pay close attention to the reliabi= lity >> of the source. The issue has become very political in the past 15 years >> or so. Don't be badly advised by someone who has their own agenda. Most >> people, to varying degrees, have their own agenda. >> Finally, if money is at stake (directly or indirectly) I strongly advise >> talking to a copyright lawyer in particular. That's just general advice. >> Taking advice from random people online is not a good idea if any money >> is involved, but I'd give the same advice to my best friend. The general >> rule applies here as it does elsewhere: "You get what you pay for." >=20 > Does one have to file legal paper work with the government to be issued a= copyright on software? >=20 No, copyrights are more like artists signing their work -- in a standardize= d way -- but every bit as legally binding. They are "first come" priority in the court of law and if-ever disputed, of= ten require correlative evidentiary proof to show true ownership (a notariz= ed copy of the work mailed to yourself kept in an unopened envelope perhaps= ). > Does any software not having a copyright statement or any license comment= s included in the source mean that it's public domain? >=20 Be careful here. The answer to your question is NO. If a work lacks a license in the source, it may be on the website. If you c= an't find a license, you must always contact the author(s) before forking s= omething. If you can neither find the license nor the contact info, it's al= ways best to assume it is not for reuse. Even the, if you used code that wa= s from an unknown origin with no license and no author, you should indicate= as such in the header of such source files. Essentially what it boils down to, is that in the court of law (if someone = indicts or brings a civil suit) you may have to account for the origin of e= very line -- so that's why: 1. If a file has an inline license (beerware, gpl, bsd, apple, or even one = you make up all your own), it must stay there to mark the origins 2. If a file is lacking an inline license, it is often because the license = is too long or unwieldy to embed and it is in a COPYING file distributed wi= th the source code OR in a terms of agreement on the website (in which case= you should download it and place it into a COPYING file). In either case, = you must package up the same COPYING file or EULA (if allowed; the file/agr= eement must be read to know if the fork is even permitted). 3. For source files which do not have an inline license and you cannot find= a separate license, add a note to the top saying how you acquired the sour= ce (feel free to put this in a separate file but it must appear somewhere o= r be readily available upon simple request to anybody and everybody). Then,= if you make modifications to the source (of unknown origin), you then slap= on your own license for your modifications. And as the last reply mentioned, if money is involved -- ask a cooyright la= wyer (the same people in the profession of defending works in the court of = law if issues arise). --=20 Devin _____________ The information contained in this message is proprietary and/or confidentia= l. If you are not the intended recipient, please: (i) delete the message an= d all copies; (ii) do not disclose, distribute or use the message in any ma= nner; and (iii) notify the sender immediately. In addition, please be aware= that any message addressed to our domain is subject to archiving and revie= w by persons other than the intended recipient. Thank you.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?13CA24D6AB415D428143D44749F57D7201EEC4FB>