Re: [HACKERS] Readline use in trouble?

> > > > Huh?  We certainly do --- or have you missed that
> > > >  * Copyright (c) 1994, Regents of the University of California
> > > > that's plastered across all the source files?
> > > Regarding which I have a question: at other locations I see (c) 1994-7
> > > Univ. of California, or even (c) 1996-9 PostgreSQL Global Development
> > > Team.
> > > I am not an expert in any of this, but I'm just wondering: when did the
> > > involvement of the U of C end, when was the Global Development Team (tm)
> > > formed and do both copyrights exits in parallel? What if someone
> > > contributes something really major and fairly independent (say like
> > > pg_access) and wants to keep his own copyright (with compatible license of
> > > course)?

I'm the one who started slapping new copyright notices around (in the
docs, mostly). imho UCB's involvement ended when they released source
code, with copyright provisions designed to retain acknowledgement of
their work while releasing them from any liability resulting from any
and all uses of the code.

We certainly *can't* simply extend UCB's copyright dates, since they
are not involved in that process. imo we *should* apply a new
copyright which enforces UCB's original provisions, which are designed
to keep the code in play while deflecting liability.

> > > And is the PostgreSQL Global Development Team any real entity that could
> > > theoretically enforce that copyright or is it just an alias for "whoever
> > > contributed"?
> > Now there's a good question.  How long does the BSD imprint remain.  I
> > assume forever.  It is still on BSD/OS files.  Only the ones they right
> > from scrath get a BSDI imprint.

We'll decide if PostgreSQL Global Development Team is a real entity
for copyright purposes when we need to ;) Really, the BSD-style
license has *no* restrictions, so what are we going to enforce? But we
*should* put some mention of things in the code to avoid cases like
the idiot American yahoo who tried to lay claim to "linux".

> So, should we be extending the Date of the BSD license?  Like, is there no
> copyright *after* 1997?  Or, can we do something like:
>  * Copyright (c) 1997-9
>  *      PostgreSQL Global Development Team
>  * Copyright (c) 1994-7
>  *      The Regents of the University of California.  All rights reserved.

I'm not a lawyer, and I don't even play one on TV. But y'all can't
extend a UCB copyright arbitrarily. We're a work derived from the
original Berkeley distribution, and we are complying with the UCB
copyright in all respects afaik. What happens after that is up to us,
not UCB...
                   - Thomas

-- 
Thomas Lockhart                lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu
South Pasadena, California