[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       git
Subject:    RE: [RFC/PATCH] Git doc: GPL2 does not apply to repo data
From:       Jonathan Smith <Jonathan.Smith () fphcare ! co ! nz>
Date:       2016-01-31 22:15:48
Message-ID: 6D15DFBB73355B4E9EFB1AD5EF9FCA31842442AA () NZ-EXCHANGE1 ! fphcare ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

Hi all

I would like to thank you each for being so helpful with my request.

As a humble developer trying to penetrate the corporate environment with leading \
technologies such as Git, it's awesome to know you guys are so proactive with \
providing support.

I'll be taking all of your contributions as ammo as I continue to fight for Git here.

Thank you!

Jonathan

-----Original Message-----
From: Junio C Hamano [mailto:gitster@pobox.com] 
Sent: Monday, February 01, 2016 11:08 AM
To: Philip Oakley <philipoakley@iee.org>
Cc: GitList <git@vger.kernel.org>; Jonathan Smith <Jonathan.Smith@fphcare.co.nz>; \
                Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] Git doc: GPL2 does not apply to repo data

Philip Oakley <philipoakley@iee.org> writes:

> diff --git a/Documentation/git.txt b/Documentation/git.txt index 
> bff6302..137c89c 100644
> --- a/Documentation/git.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/git.txt
> @@ -1132,6 +1132,17 @@ of clones and fetches.
> 	  - any external helpers are named by their protocol (e.g., use
> 	    `hg` to allow the `git-remote-hg` helper)
> 
> +Licencing: Your data, and the Git tool[[Licencing]]
> +---------------------------------------------------
> +
> +Git is an open source tool provided under GPL2.
> +Git was designed to be, and is, the version control system for the 
> +Linux codebase.
> +Your respository data created by Git is not subject to Git's GNU2 
> +licence, see GPL FAQs 
> +http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.en.html#TOCGPLOutput).
> +
> +User should apply a licence of their own choice to their repository data.
> 
> Discussion[[Discussion]]
> ------------------------

While I know you mean well, and I do understand the sentiment behind this addition, \
there are at least two reasons why I do not want to (and why we should not) add any \
"clarification" or "interpretation" like this.

One is because such a statement is pointless.  Because we do not do copyright \
assignment to the project, you are not the sole copyright owner of Git.  Individual \
contributors hold copyright to the part they wrote.  The above statement you made, \
even with an endorsement by me as the project lead, does not have any power to assure \
that the users will not get sued by one copyright holder, who is not you or me, and \
at that point it is up to the court to interpret GPLv2. We can call such a copyright \
holder crazy or call such a suit frivolous, but that does not change the fact that \
the court is what decides the matter, so having that statement does not help the \
user.

Another is because we are amateurs.  Philip, you may or may not be a lawyer yourself, \
but I know you are not _our_ lawyer.  An amateurish "interpretation" or \
"clarification" does not necessarily clarify the text but it muddies it, especially \
when done carelessly.  Imagine a case where a user creates a derived work of Git \
itself and stored it in a Git repository.  "Your respository data created by Git is \
not subject to Git's GNU2"--really?  At least the phrasing must say that the act of \
storing something in Git alone would not *MAKE* that something governed under GPLv2.  \
What the user puts in Git may already be covered under GPLv2 for other reasons, and a \
statement carelessly written like the above can be twisted to read as if we are \
endorsing use of our code outside GPLv2 as long as they store it in Git repository, \
which is not what you meant to say, but "that is not what the copyright holder meant" \
is another thing the lawyer need to argue in court to convince the judge, when we \
need to go after a real copyright violator.

We should leave the lawyering to real lawyers and we should not add unnecessary work \
of interpreting our amateurish loose statement to our laywers.

Thanks.
____________________________________________________________

This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential information. If you
are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in error)
please notify the sender immediately and destroy this e-mail. Any
unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this 
e-mail is strictly forbidden.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]