Return-Path: Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20030306144819.024ee5c0@mail1.qualcomm.com> Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2003 14:51:16 -0800 To: Stephen Crane , Marcel Holtmann From: Max Krasnyansky Subject: Re: [Bluez-devel] Bluetooth Qualification - plan to make a plan Cc: halam.rose@7layers-uk.com, BlueZ Mailing List In-Reply-To: <1046868444.2860.1095.camel@baroque.rococosoft.com> References: <1046865863.1823.55.camel@pegasus.local> <1046865863.1823.55.camel@pegasus.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" List-ID: At 04:47 AM 3/5/2003, Stephen Crane wrote: >On Wed, 2003-03-05 at 12:04, Marcel Holtmann wrote: >> > BlueZ seems to be the sole copyright of Qualcomm - is this correct? >> > >> > Would it be appropriate to make the listing in the name of Qualcomm with Max >> > as the contact, or is there now some other kind of BlueZ organisation? >> >> The copyright thing is not very easy. The core code (HCI and L2CAP) are >> copyright of Qualcomm, the BNEP code contains copyright from Inventel >> and Max, the RFCOMM code has copyright from Max and me. The HCI drivers >> have much more different copyrights inside. For the user space part you >> will also get some more names. >> >> Maybe my idea with an own organization for BlueZ is a good one. > >Or turn the copyright over to the FSF? Very very very very (whole bunch of "very" words here) unlikely :) >(I'd push to have the user-space libs relicensed under the LGPL first though.) Yeah, thanks for reminder :) Max