Re: Re-write

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@ifi.uio.no>]

Simon Josefsson <jas@pdc.kth.se> writes:

> I mean, if I submit a patch to a program I don't have to sign over the
> copyright to the FSF. In fact, I would own the copyright of that
> patch, not the FSF.

Yes.  Or rather, you'd own the copyright of your code contained in
that patch.

> Everyone (or at least the FSF?) seems to think that the FSF still owns
> the copyright of the entire program though. 

That is also true.  :-)  

> But if this would be the case, it would also mean that my "patches"
> to nnimap.el is still owned by the original nnimap author and would
> not be my property.

No.  

There are two issues here -- licensing and derivative works.

1) Licensing.  All code you write (barring someone owning you, i.e.,
   you work for a company that claims to own everything you do)
   belongs to you.  You are free to license the code you write under
   as many licenses as you feel like.  For instance, I can write a
   function, and then release it under GPL, BSD, MPL, pd, and
   propriatary licenses.  If someone takes the pd version, includes it
   in a non-pd program, that does not change your ownership, and you
   are free to license it under other licenses.  (Which is what you
   want to do here -- your code was originally included in a program
   that was copyrighter someone else, and now you want to license it
   to the FSF.)

2) Derivative works.  The copyright of a derivative work is the same
   as the copyright of the original work.  If I patch Emacs, the
   resulting derivative work is still owned by the FSF.  The code in
   the patch itself, though, is owned by me, and I may later choose to
   apply it to Microsoft Word, after I decided to go working for
   Microsoft.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
  larsi@ifi.uio.no * Lars Ingebrigtsen