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

Tom Callaway tcallawa at redhat.com
Mon Dec 12 18:41:16 UTC 2011

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.


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.


Fedora Project

More information about the legal mailing list