[linux-audio-dev] GPL concerns

[Erik de Castro Lopo]

On Wed, 06 Apr 2005 14:56:19 -0500
Shane <lists at itsagesolutions.com> wrote:

> Jan,
> 
> Thank you for your comments.  I should clarify from the perspective of
> an independent software developer with no previous relationship to the
> company issuing the NDA that may or may not be valid or legal... 
> 
> First of all, the (hypothetical) NDA requires that the copyright to any
> work rendered for the company based on the codebase in question be
> retained by the company. 

Thats the case with all work for hire situations.

> Some parts are developed in house, some are
> GPL.  The NDA also essenstially asks that I surrender my right under the
> GPL or other applicable licenses to redistribute any part of this work. 

This is till work for hire right? If you were working for microsoft,
would you expect to be able to redistribute the stuff you wrote for
them?

> While this company has stated that they will release the entire codebase
> under GPL into the public domain

Careful, GPL and public domain are two different things. GPL means that
someone owns the copyright but gives the user the rights allowed by the
GPL. Public domain means that the original author has given up any claim
to copyright.

> Would this have any change on the legal status of such an agreement??

That sounds sensible.

> Or
> is it simply an individually binding agreement between the company and a
> developer?

I would go for this interpretation.

Erik
-- 
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
  Erik de Castro Lopo  nospam at mega-nerd.com (Yes it's valid)
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
"OS X is great that way.  I put a copy of OS X on my coffee table,
and it hasn't been hacked yet. Yes, I am using it as a server. I
serve several meals on it every week." -- Anthony Minkoff