Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Mon, 31 Oct 2022 06:31:01 -0700
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To:     Chuck Lever III <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
        Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>,
        Linux NFS Mailing List <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nfsd: fix licensing header in filecache.c
Message-ID: <Y1/OFbwh8WtbjKH0@infradead.org>
References: <20221026143518.250122-1-jlayton@kernel.org>
 <Y1+A7XzxKbRCCH4z@infradead.org>
 <3C6909FD-6079-48AC-93E2-BD7937E31F86@oracle.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3C6909FD-6079-48AC-93E2-BD7937E31F86@oracle.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 01:21:45PM +0000, Chuck Lever III wrote:
> I know you are Not A Lawyer (tm), but:
> 
> The e-mail address in the copyright notice is stale. Is the convention
> to leave stale e-mail addresses in place?
> 
> So I would expect copyright ownership of this code to go to Primary Data,
> Jeff's employer at the time. But they don't exist now either; it might
> be difficult to get permission from them to alter this notice.

I'm not a copyright lawyer, but I've talked to a few, so:

 - first, does Jeff own the copyright for this code, or his employer at
   the time?
 - if he owns it, can cna do pretty much whatever he wants
 - if he doesn't, I would not touch it without approval from the
   copyright holder, which gets a little complicated for a company
   that doesn't exist in that form any more.