[coreboot] [commit] r5717 - in trunk/src/superio/fintek: . f71863fg

[Qing Pei Wang]

sorry about the copyright things. it's an old patch about this superio which
used by the jetway mainboard, and i just used my own perl script to
deal with all of the format things and copyright things. I am not much
understand all of these copy right things. I am a new guy about these.
the patch which is attached restore the copyright to its  original status.

Signed-off-by: Wang Qing Pei <wangqingpei at gmail.com>

On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 6:44 AM, xdrudis <xdrudis at tinet.cat> wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 05:53:19PM -0400, Corey Osgood wrote:
> >
> > Here's the problem: some time ago, someone wrote a superio chip.h that
> > contained this:
> >
>
> [...]
>
> Sorry, I didn't understand the problem. I thought it was triviality and
> it was removal of the whole contribution of a previous author.
>
>
> > removing everything that I did to that file. So why should they leave
> > me as a copyright holder on the file?
> >
>
> Because it is easier than finding out who is the real author of the part
> of the file that survives. It makes nothing worse than it was and
> it does not bring more risks than removing your name.  If they remove
> your copyright statement they have to make sure that you really didn't
> change more than what they have replaced. They may not be able to
> verify that unless svn kept track of which was the original file (I
> think it depends on whether you did svn cp or cp ?). If they leave
> your name and there's nothing you wrote on the file what's the worst
> than can happen ? That you sue them for attributing to you something
> you didn't write ? I don't think you could, specially if they add
> their own name, they are not saying which author wrote what. They took
> a collective work, made a derivative work and added their name to the
> previous authors. If you don't want that then simply add a comment
> speciying which part are yours and which aren't (but I hope you don't).
> If they remove your name and somehow you had changed
> something in the file that's still there they could have more
> problems, I think.
>
> If somebody knew what the first file was, at least pepole could always
> use that as a template and keep the copyright notices shorter (they and
> the original author). But if it's too late for that I don't think
> that following the routine of keeping the original copyrights has
> so severe a consequence that it is worth making exceptions.
>
> But I think I'm arguing too much for something that it is not so important
> to me and that I'm no expert in.  I feel like I'm splitting hair. I should
> be splitting patches...
>
>
>
>
> --
> coreboot mailing list: coreboot at coreboot.org
> http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
>



-- 
Wang Qing Pei
Phone: 86+13426369984
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.coreboot.org/pipermail/coreboot/attachments/20100819/a8be4b61/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: copyright.diff
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 1753 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://www.coreboot.org/pipermail/coreboot/attachments/20100819/a8be4b61/attachment.obj>