Re: Update on Software Freedom Law Center work

2006-04-02 Thread Troy Rollo
On Monday 03 April 2006 11:46, Jan Zerebecki wrote: > On Mon, Apr 03, 2006 at 09:58:26AM +1000, Troy Rollo wrote: > Is there a case possible where neither can be constructed without > hassle? Think something like: insurance against GPL violators. The insurance company has to be able to demonstrat

Re: Update on Software Freedom Law Center work

2006-04-02 Thread Jan Zerebecki
On Mon, Apr 03, 2006 at 09:58:26AM +1000, Troy Rollo wrote: > On Saturday 01 April 2006 18:43, Jan Zerebecki wrote: > > To enforce the licence one doesn't need any copyright (asignment) > > at the work at all. You just need to be appointed by (one of) the > > copyright holder(s) to enforce it. > >

Re: Update on Software Freedom Law Center work

2006-04-02 Thread Dimi Paun
On Mon, 2006-04-03 at 09:58 +1000, Troy Rollo wrote: > This is correct - the only reason you would need to own the whole of > the copyright is if you wanted to re-license in circumstances or under > terms not within the existing licence. Even more reason to assign only partly the copyright. That i

Re: Update on Software Freedom Law Center work

2006-04-02 Thread Troy Rollo
On Saturday 01 April 2006 18:43, Jan Zerebecki wrote: > To enforce the licence one doesn't need any copyright (asignment) > at the work at all. You just need to be appointed by (one of) the > copyright holder(s) to enforce it. This is not generally the case. If you don't own the copyright, you can

Re: Update on Software Freedom Law Center work

2006-03-31 Thread Jan Zerebecki
On Fri, Mar 31, 2006 at 05:59:49PM -0800, Scott Ritchie wrote: > On Fri, 2006-03-31 at 22:33 +0100, Mike Hearn wrote: > > > There will also be the possibility of assigning our copyrights to that > > > organization, which would make it easier to enforce the license > > > > Copyright assignment in o

Re: Update on Software Freedom Law Center work

2006-03-31 Thread Scott Ritchie
On Fri, 2006-03-31 at 22:33 +0100, Mike Hearn wrote: > > There will also be the possibility of assigning our copyrights to that > > organization, which would make it easier to enforce the license > > Copyright assignment in other projects has been tricky, and it can't be > done retroactively. It

Re: Update on Software Freedom Law Center work

2006-03-31 Thread Kai Blin
* Alexandre Julliard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [31/03/06, 23:27:51]: > 2. Non-profit organization > > There are many advantages to having a non-profit organization for a > project, for instance to allow tax-exempt donations, or hold assets > like trademarks. However it's a lot of paperwork to do, so w

Re: Update on Software Freedom Law Center work

2006-03-31 Thread Mike Hearn
There will also be the possibility of assigning our copyrights to that organization, which would make it easier to enforce the license Copyright assignment in other projects has been tricky, and it can't be done retroactively. It usually requires developers to submit paperwork - we don't reall

Update on Software Freedom Law Center work

2006-03-31 Thread Alexandre Julliard
Folks, As announced at the last Wineconf, Jeremy and myself have been working for a few months now with the Software Freedom Law Center on a number of legal issues concerning Wine. We've been mostly quiet about it, so I thought I'd post a status update. There are two major tasks going on at the mo