[Fedora-legal-list] are copyright headers for all source files required?

[Tom Callaway]

On 12/11/2011 08:13 PM, Rex Dieter wrote:
> In other words, say there are a small number of source files in a packaged 
> (tarball) work that lack any or clear copyright header, should that be 
> considered a review blocker?
> 
> IANAL and being a generally pragmatic fellow, I'd hoped that we could 
> generally give upstreams the benefit of the doubt, for lack of any contrary 
> evidence.

So, the answer here is yes (with caveats), as long as we have clear
evidence that the files are part of a larger work where there is
consistent licensing intent.

CAVEATS:

If the files look like they were copied from somewhere else (or we know
they were), then we need to clarify the per-file licensing.

If there is no overall licensing statement for the project (e.g. a
README stating that the project is BSD), then we need to clarify the
per-file licensing.

If there are a mix of licenses in play, and it is a confusing situation
where some binaries end up being GPL-incompatible while others are
GPL-compatible, then I'd say we need to clarify the per-file licensing.

In any case, we should be trying to get upstream to resolve those
issues, even if it isn't blocking inclusion in Fedora.

~tom

==
Fedora Project