MESSAGE
DATE | 2015-03-17 |
FROM | Rick Moen
|
SUBJECT | Re: [NYLXS - HANGOUT] Apple crimes
|
Quoting prmarino1-at-gmail.com (prmarino1-at-gmail.com):
> The key here is do they redistribute it as binaries if the do they > have to supply the source for every modification the made.
For all the years I've looked at the matter, they do contribute back source on third-party projects, under the project's upstream licence. They're not fools; for one thing, they understad that private forks are a support and maintenance burden.
If there's any suggestion they're failing to honour copyleft terms, I can't find it, and nobody appears to be claiming it, including the Phoronix piece.
> Further more it is then at the option of the upstream project to > absorb those changes into the upstream code. Once that happens > than yes the owner of the upstream project owns the modifications;
You are mistaken. The Copyright Act and Berne Convention Treaty vest the copyright title over any covert work in the creator's hands at the instant of the work's creation 'in fixed form'. The only way provided for in US law to _change_ ownership of a copyright-covered work is as specified in 17 U.S.C. 204:
A transfer of copyright ownership, other than by operation of law, is not valid unless an instrument of conveyance, or a note or memorandum of the transfer, is in writing and signed by the owner of the rights conveyed or such owner's duly authorized agent.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/204
|
|