Re: [HACKERS]

Neil Conway wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-02-27 at 16:20 -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> > Thus we may literally not have rights to the code. Do you really want to
> > go down the path of in 2 years, Fujitsu (No offense Fujitsu), but you
> > are the topic) decides that the code they provided is owned by them and
> > they didn't give us permission?
>
> For the case in question, sure, requiring some clarification from FJ
> would be reasonable. But more broadly, my point is that I think you're
> fooling yourself if you think that requiring a disclaimer or explicit
> transfer of copyright for this *one* particular patch is likely to make
> any material difference to the overall copyright status of the code
> base.

Yes, I do.  If there is an explicit claim, like an email footer or a
copyright in the code, we do try to nail that down.

--
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>          http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                               http://www.enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +