On Tue, 2007-02-27 at 16:20 -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Thus we may literally not have rights to the code. Do you really want to
> go down the path of in 2 years, Fujitsu (No offense Fujitsu), but you
> are the topic) decides that the code they provided is owned by them and
> they didn't give us permission?
For the case in question, sure, requiring some clarification from FJ
would be reasonable. But more broadly, my point is that I think you're
fooling yourself if you think that requiring a disclaimer or explicit
transfer of copyright for this *one* particular patch is likely to make
any material difference to the overall copyright status of the code
base.
-Neil
