|Re: [NYLXS - HANGOUT] Apple crimes
Quoting prmarino1-at-gmail.com (prmarino1-at-gmail.com):
> The key here is do they redistribute it as binaries if the do they
> have to supply the source for every modification the made.
For all the years I've looked at the matter, they do contribute back
source on third-party projects, under the project's upstream licence.
They're not fools; for one thing, they understad that private forks are
a support and maintenance burden.
If there's any suggestion they're failing to honour copyleft terms, I
can't find it, and nobody appears to be claiming it, including the
> Further more it is then at the option of the upstream project to
> absorb those changes into the upstream code. Once that happens
> than yes the owner of the upstream project owns the modifications;
You are mistaken. The Copyright Act and Berne Convention Treaty vest
the copyright title over any covert work in the creator's hands at the
instant of the work's creation 'in fixed form'. The only way provided
for in US law to _change_ ownership of a copyright-covered work is as
specified in 17 U.S.C. 204:
A transfer of copyright ownership, other than by operation of law, is
not valid unless an instrument of conveyance, or a note or memorandum of
the transfer, is in writing and signed by the owner of the rights
conveyed or such owner's duly authorized agent.