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

List:       koffice-devel
Subject:    Re: Abusive copyright removal
From:       "C. Boemann" <cbo () boemann ! dk>
Date:       2010-03-29 23:09:09
Message-ID: 201003300109.09190.cbo () boemann ! dk
[Download RAW message or body]

On Tuesday 30 March 2010 00:40:18 Jaroslaw S wrote:
> On 29 March 2010 23:57, C. Boemann <cbo@boemann.dk> wrote:
> > On Monday 29 March 2010 23:35:58 Thomas Zander wrote:
> >> On Monday 29. March 2010 22.21.03 Pierre wrote:
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > It is not the first time that I see this occurring, but it appears
> >> > that Thomas Zander has removed some copyright notices in the source
> >> > code. I send this email publicly because that behaviour is just
> >> > dangerous. If it was a mistake, then I would really like to understand
> >> > how it could happen. The latest abusive copyright removal was in
> >> > commit r1108276. A previous one was noticed by Sebastian Sauer 
months
> >> > ago, I'm sorry I had to purge my archives because they started taking
> >> > too much space so I can't provide any commit revision...
> >> > So please, Thomas, can you explain why you do this ?
> >>
> >> Hmm, do you really think this tone is needed or productive?
> >>
> >> If you think this was removed in error please tell us what copyright you
> >>  still own in that file.
> >
> > Thomas, the burden on proof is on you. If you want to remove someone from
> > copyrights, I expect you to come up with an extensive case study,
> > presented here on the mailing list and asking the person in question
> > beforehand.
> 
> Well, to be honest, at least the copyright in KWTextDocumentLayout.cpp
> was added for really minor changes (r846840) and there are no later
> changes:
> 
> 
http://websvn.kde.org/trunk/koffice/kword/part/frames/KWTextDocumentLayout.
> cpp?view=log&pathrev=1108276
ok fair enough  - claiming copyright on such a small change  (some spaces and 
moving a call) doesn't constitute much of a copyright claim.

Still even in this case where the order of those two call are still there, or 
even with total removal of said work - I don't believe removing of a copyright 
is correct.

Another person might also have copied the work to some other place in the file 
constituting derived work.

In short - no copyright removal ever !

And I also don't see the point of removing copyrights in the first place.

> I haven't try the other files.
> 
> > And
> > certainly not hidden away in a big commit where it's not even mentioned
> > in the commit message.
> 
> that's right..
> 
_______________________________________________
koffice-devel mailing list
koffice-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/koffice-devel
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]