Hi there. I was chatting with Knut about this, and thought I should
bring it forward to the list. Recently, I have contributed some
reports and SQL to the /resources directory on trunk. I have not
included any copyright or licensing information there. I would assume
that this particular information should be copyrighted by the WHO, as
they were the ones paying me during the consultancy. WHO also had some
issues with some of the OpenSource licenses, and there was a derived
license developed during the OpenHealth prototype development
process. So, in this particular case, I would like to suggest that the
stuff that I committed should be amended somehow with a WHO copyright
and likely licensed with the special WHO license. However, this brings
up the bigger issue of how to handle contributions by those of us that
are not part of the University of Oslo, who is the copyright holder
for the main chunk of code. Bob, maybe you have a solution here?
Anybody else have thoughts?
Seems equally messy. Maybe sticking with the original license (DHIS2
that is) and assign copyright to WHO. Some guidelines for this would
be good.....I am not volunteering for this however.
···
On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 2:47 PM, Knut Staring <knutst@gmail.com> wrote:
Copyright to WHO makes some sense to me, but it will be too messy to use a
different license, I think.
It is preferable to have things in one project under the same license.
Alternatively, I suppose it could be put on https://launchpad.net/openhealth
under WHO copyright and license?
Knut
On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 1:27 PM, Jason Pickering > <jason.p.pickering@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi there. I was chatting with Knut about this, and thought I should
bring it forward to the list. Recently, I have contributed some
reports and SQL to the /resources directory on trunk. I have not
included any copyright or licensing information there. I would assume
that this particular information should be copyrighted by the WHO, as
they were the ones paying me during the consultancy. WHO also had some
issues with some of the OpenSource licenses, and there was a derived
license developed during the OpenHealth prototype development
process. So, in this particular case, I would like to suggest that the
stuff that I committed should be amended somehow with a WHO copyright
and likely licensed with the special WHO license. However, this brings
up the bigger issue of how to handle contributions by those of us that
are not part of the University of Oslo, who is the copyright holder
for the main chunk of code. Bob, maybe you have a solution here?
Anybody else have thoughts?
