Copyright notice - NTP

This is a discussion on Copyright notice - NTP ; Folks, Lots of folks have been chipping away at me over the years about the copyright notice in the NTP distribution. I have refused to change the wording on the basis this might disenfranchise current users. Well, I took the ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Copyright notice

  1. Copyright notice

    Folks,

    Lots of folks have been chipping away at me over the years about the
    copyright notice in the NTP distribution. I have refused to change the
    wording on the basis this might disenfranchise current users. Well, I
    took the case to the lawyers in our Univerisity Intellectual Properties
    Office and they told me the current wording is perfect and not to change
    anything. They did suggest I change the copyright holder to the
    University of Delaware on the basis this might deflect complaints to me
    personally. I have done that and so it remains.

    Dave

  2. Re: Copyright notice

    "David L. Mills" writes:

    >Folks,


    >Lots of folks have been chipping away at me over the years about the
    >copyright notice in the NTP distribution. I have refused to change the
    >wording on the basis this might disenfranchise current users. Well, I
    >took the case to the lawyers in our Univerisity Intellectual Properties
    >Office and they told me the current wording is perfect and not to change
    >anything. They did suggest I change the copyright holder to the
    >University of Delaware on the basis this might deflect complaints to me
    >personally. I have done that and so it remains.


    >Dave


    Actually that may be problematic. NTP is NOT just yours. It belongs to all
    who contribute to it. Their works which are included are derivative works
    based on your work, and as a r esult fall under both your and their
    copyright. NOw you are perfectly within your rights to transfer copyright
    in your work to the U of Deleware ( or depending on your contract with them, all your
    work may be work for hire and have always belonged to them) but the work of
    others does NOT belong to either you or U Del. YOu could also all
    contributors totransfer copyright to you or U Del. but without such a
    transfer, it belongs to them.
    Note no current change in the copyright notice can disenfranchise old
    users. The contract under which they aquired the software cannot be
    unilaterally changed by you (unless you demand that they sign a contract
    which explicitley gives you that right).)


  3. Re: Copyright notice

    Bill,

    This issue was raised with the Univesity lawyers; I hear what they have
    to say. I do not hear what you have to say. The lawyers tell me to
    suggest you talk to them directly. Menawhile, please bug off.

    Dave

    Unruh wrote:

    > "David L. Mills" writes:
    >
    >
    >>Folks,

    >
    >
    >>Lots of folks have been chipping away at me over the years about the
    >>copyright notice in the NTP distribution. I have refused to change the
    >>wording on the basis this might disenfranchise current users. Well, I
    >>took the case to the lawyers in our Univerisity Intellectual Properties
    >>Office and they told me the current wording is perfect and not to change
    >>anything. They did suggest I change the copyright holder to the
    >>University of Delaware on the basis this might deflect complaints to me
    >>personally. I have done that and so it remains.

    >
    >
    >>Dave

    >
    >
    > Actually that may be problematic. NTP is NOT just yours. It belongs to all
    > who contribute to it. Their works which are included are derivative works
    > based on your work, and as a r esult fall under both your and their
    > copyright. NOw you are perfectly within your rights to transfer copyright
    > in your work to the U of Deleware ( or depending on your contract with them, all your
    > work may be work for hire and have always belonged to them) but the work of
    > others does NOT belong to either you or U Del. YOu could also all
    > contributors totransfer copyright to you or U Del. but without such a
    > transfer, it belongs to them.
    > Note no current change in the copyright notice can disenfranchise old
    > users. The contract under which they aquired the software cannot be
    > unilaterally changed by you (unless you demand that they sign a contract
    > which explicitley gives you that right).)
    >


  4. Re: Copyright notice

    "David L. Mills" writes:

    >Bill,


    >This issue was raised with the Univesity lawyers; I hear what they have
    >to say. I do not hear what you have to say. The lawyers tell me to
    >suggest you talk to them directly. Menawhile, please bug off.


    Not clear which of the many issues I raised you are claiming they disagree
    with me on-- if any.
    a) If you wrote the software, you own the copyright, not the U delaware,
    unless it was a work for hire. You may have transfered copyright to them.
    That is up to you and your contract with the university.
    b) You do not own the copyright in works others did unless they explicitly
    transfered copyright to you.
    c)You cannot unilaterally change the copyright license under which any
    user orginally aquired the work.

    Which of those points are you claiming they disagreed with?



    >Dave


    >Unruh wrote:


    >> "David L. Mills" writes:
    >>
    >>
    >>>Folks,

    >>
    >>
    >>>Lots of folks have been chipping away at me over the years about the
    >>>copyright notice in the NTP distribution. I have refused to change the
    >>>wording on the basis this might disenfranchise current users. Well, I
    >>>took the case to the lawyers in our Univerisity Intellectual Properties
    >>>Office and they told me the current wording is perfect and not to change
    >>>anything. They did suggest I change the copyright holder to the
    >>>University of Delaware on the basis this might deflect complaints to me
    >>>personally. I have done that and so it remains.

    >>
    >>
    >>>Dave

    >>
    >>
    >> Actually that may be problematic. NTP is NOT just yours. It belongs to all
    >> who contribute to it. Their works which are included are derivative works
    >> based on your work, and as a r esult fall under both your and their
    >> copyright. NOw you are perfectly within your rights to transfer copyright
    >> in your work to the U of Deleware ( or depending on your contract with them, all your
    >> work may be work for hire and have always belonged to them) but the work of
    >> others does NOT belong to either you or U Del. YOu could also all
    >> contributors totransfer copyright to you or U Del. but without such a
    >> transfer, it belongs to them.
    >> Note no current change in the copyright notice can disenfranchise old
    >> users. The contract under which they aquired the software cannot be
    >> unilaterally changed by you (unless you demand that they sign a contract
    >> which explicitley gives you that right).)
    >>


  5. Re: Copyright notice

    Bill,

    You are invited to contact Mr. Brad Yops, an attorney in our Research
    Office and raise your issues with him directly. His number is in our
    online web directory. I am unwilling to be an interpreter between the
    two of you.

    Dave

    Unruh wrote:

    > "David L. Mills" writes:
    >
    >
    >>Bill,

    >
    >
    >>This issue was raised with the Univesity lawyers; I hear what they have
    >>to say. I do not hear what you have to say. The lawyers tell me to
    >>suggest you talk to them directly. Menawhile, please bug off.

    >
    >
    > Not clear which of the many issues I raised you are claiming they disagree
    > with me on-- if any.
    > a) If you wrote the software, you own the copyright, not the U delaware,
    > unless it was a work for hire. You may have transfered copyright to them.
    > That is up to you and your contract with the university.
    > b) You do not own the copyright in works others did unless they explicitly
    > transfered copyright to you.
    > c)You cannot unilaterally change the copyright license under which any
    > user orginally aquired the work.
    >
    > Which of those points are you claiming they disagreed with?
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >>Dave

    >
    >
    >>Unruh wrote:

    >
    >
    >>>"David L. Mills" writes:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Folks,
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Lots of folks have been chipping away at me over the years about the
    >>>>copyright notice in the NTP distribution. I have refused to change the
    >>>>wording on the basis this might disenfranchise current users. Well, I
    >>>>took the case to the lawyers in our Univerisity Intellectual Properties
    >>>>Office and they told me the current wording is perfect and not to change
    >>>>anything. They did suggest I change the copyright holder to the
    >>>>University of Delaware on the basis this might deflect complaints to me
    >>>>personally. I have done that and so it remains.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Dave
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>Actually that may be problematic. NTP is NOT just yours. It belongs to all
    >>>who contribute to it. Their works which are included are derivative works
    >>>based on your work, and as a r esult fall under both your and their
    >>>copyright. NOw you are perfectly within your rights to transfer copyright
    >>>in your work to the U of Deleware ( or depending on your contract with them, all your
    >>>work may be work for hire and have always belonged to them) but the work of
    >>>others does NOT belong to either you or U Del. YOu could also all
    >>>contributors totransfer copyright to you or U Del. but without such a
    >>>transfer, it belongs to them.
    >>>Note no current change in the copyright notice can disenfranchise old
    >>>users. The contract under which they aquired the software cannot be
    >>>unilaterally changed by you (unless you demand that they sign a contract
    >>>which explicitley gives you that right).)
    >>>


+ Reply to Thread