[399] in linux-security and linux-alert archive
Re: console security (was Re: problem wi
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Raul Miller)
Fri Sep 29 00:39:49 1995
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 1995 16:28:19 -0400
From: Raul Miller <moth@magenta.com>
Reply-to: Raul Miller <moth@magenta.com>
To: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@MIT.EDU>
Cc: linux-security@tarsier.cv.nrao.edu
In-reply-to: <306B2F36@smtpgw.legislate.com> (RDMiller@legislate.com)
Ted Ts'o writes:
Huh? There is no copyright notice on setserial at all, mostly
because I never got around to it --- it was originally such a
trivial program that I never bothered. An oversight on my part;
the intent was that the file be freely redistributable, and indeed
it's my impression that most distributions are including it as a
matter of course.
Sounds good.
For what it's worth, the legal status of a document without a
copyright is that no one is allowed to distribute it but the author.
This has been international law for the last few years. [Older
documents without copyright notices are still distributable under the
old rules.]
This is the first that I had heard that anyone had any hangups
about the copyright status of setserial; I wish people who had such
concerns would contact me directly, instead of flaming publically
about it. I very easily put a free redistribution notice on the
file, if that what it takes to make people happy.
I apologize for this flame bit. At the time I composed that letter, I
had long since moved to a system without a copy of setserial (or its
sources) -- I did not think I had a right to them. I didn't know you
were the author, or I would have pointed this aspect out to you.
I don't think this conversation has much to do with linux-security
beyond this: I'm sorry about the flame.
--
Raul
