Samba and GPL

[David Flynn]

Eavning, andreas

just a small thing that i think needs correcting


> Hello,
>
> I did follow the discussion about the GPL, samba and SSL and I have  my
> opinion to post.
>
> 1. Andrew Tridgell owns the copyright

yes, and anyone who has submitted code to it owns the copyright on that code

> 2. This gives Andrew ALL the rights on samba

apart from code not submitted by him

> He has even the right to sell it

so does everyone else

> or use it under another license.

as long as he can get permission from everyone who has submitted code to
allow him to change the license under which their code was submitted

> In my opinion GPL does only force the rest
> of the world to redistribute samba with sources.
>Andrew can give it away
> without the source.

he _has_ to make the source avaliable if he makes the binaries _publically_
avaliable
anyone may make changes to the code, and not release them at all, as long as
the binaries are only for private use
>
>
> 3. If GPL permits you to study the samba sourcecode and rewrite the
> functionality ( without copying the sources ) you can set this application
> under GPL, but you can also give away a runtime only, as long as YOU have
the
> copyright.

i dont quite understand ? are you trying to make the point similar to
fraunhoffer and the algorithems used in MP3, if you look at what they have
done and go and write something that gives the "same" result but does it in
a completly different way, you do not owe any royalties to fraunhoffer for
use of their IP (the algorithems they wrote)

> 4. What I miss on the samba mailing lists and websites is a statement that
> tells that every patch or modification becomes copyright of Andrew ( or
the
> entire samba team ). What happens if a programmer that did post big
patches
> reclaims his copyright on his pathes in the future ?

He has never lost the copyright of the material he submitted, as he has
never signed an agreement transfering his rights to andrew

> www.phpgroupware.org ask that you give them the copyright if you send in
> patches or by changes to the source. Naturally this gives them the right
of 2.

hence, andrew would have to get permission from all the copyright owners to
change the license their code is submitted under


Thanks,

Dave

---------------------------------------
The information in this e-mail and any files sent with it is confidential to
the ordinary user of the e-mail address to which it was addressed and may
also be legally privileged. It is not to be relied upon by any person other
than the addressee except with the sender's prior written approval. If no
such approval is given, the sender will not accept liability (in negligence
or otherwise) arising from any third party acting, or refraining from
acting, on such information. If you are not the intended recipient of this
e-mail you may not copy, forward, disclose or otherwise use it or any part
of it in any form whatsoever. If you have received this e-mail in error
please notify the sender immediately, destroy any copies and delete it from
your computer system. Have a nice Day !
---------------------------------------------