Re: [boost] Copyright-less licence references

Subject: Re: [boost] Copyright-less licence references
From: Gennadiy Rozental (rogeeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-09-15 16:39:19

John Maddock <jz.maddock <at> googlemail.com> writes:

> 
> 
> > Well, I am bring it up. Steering committee is free to discuss, respond 
or
> > ignore. As it stands my source code either lying almost all the time, 
or
> > missing copyright or I need to keep updating 700+ file all the times. 
Unless
> > this changes, I am inclined to change disclaimer everywhere to 
"Copyright
> > 2001 Boost.Test authors" and be done with that.
> That's explicitly against the terms of the BSL, if you did do that, 
> expect ructions.

Why is that? Can you please point me specifically where does it say that?

Line above at least is going to be "almost" true. Me (starting 2001-ish) 
and Raffi (starting 2013) are Boost.Test authors and we both agree to 
assign the copyright to the "team". We collectively started to work on this 
code in 2001. Code migrated over time from one file to another, so file 
creating time in irrelevant. 

> > Each library has README file. It should be enough to just have 
Copyright in
> > that one file IMO. And it won't be a real copyright attribution, but 
more
> > like acknowledgement: these guys worked on this code.
> 
> Which part of "Boost took legal advice" when setting this up did you not 
> understand?

I am not quite sure why you are taking this personally. As I mention this 
kind of copyright is used by Google (as well as complete absence of any 
Copyright disclaimers - only Apache licence for HBase project) and I would 
believe their lawyers more than anyone we can afford to consult.

For me this is practical issue. I am not trying to make anyone to give up 
their copyright.

Gennadiy