 |
 |
> If other contribute to a file, it depends on the size of their > contribution whether it warrants a sharing of the copyright. It's usually not a good idea to have more than one copyright holder. Problems can arise when they disagree. One possibility is to have a single copyright holder for each file. However, it's probably best to have contributors assign copyright to a single person or legal entity. > Projects such as GNU projects put in their organization, but > developers are typically required to submit copyright assignment forms > in which they declare that the copyright of their contributions goes > to the foundation. For the record, while the Free Software Foundation/GNU Project does encourage maintainers to assign copyright to the FSF, this is not required. I'm the author and maintainer of a GNU package, and I originally kept the copyright. I did eventually choose to assign it to the FSF. > On 9/14/06, William Denton <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >> What do ad hoc software projects do about naming a copyright holder when >> putting their work under a free software license? The licenses I've >> looked at have "insert copyright holder here," but what's the best thing >> to put there when it's a few people hacking something informally? This is a potential minefield. If one plans to publish a piece of software, it is very unwise to work with people on an ad hoc basis. One should have a formal contract regulating copyright issues. >> what's the best source for advice >> about what to put in the copyright statement? It's a legal issue, so the _only_ source of reliable information is a lawyer. Anything else, including what I write, is hearsay. Nonetheless, it is useful to read the information that's available for lay people. There are books about copyright for authors available, and the U.S. Copyright office has information on its website. The "Information For Maintainers" on the GNU Project's website may also be useful to you. Laurence Finston