Hi,

This is a very good question.  I think the answer from Craig's comments,
(please correct me if I'm wrong here IANAL) is that the contribution has to
represent a significant change to be copyrightable.  Formatting, comments,
adding or removing temps would not count as original material.  So the
author is the person that contributed a significant portion of original
material to the current version.

Why would this be a good test?  I think because without the improvement
represented by a significant change, the method would have no or limited
utility.  Now if the method represents something that is obvious, and it
could be reproduced without reference to the original code, (reengineered)
that would be considered an original contribution and not a derivation.

If we could adopt a previous version from someone that signed the agreement,
(and that person represents an original contribution, or a significant
change from the original method) and we reapplied a bug fix or a feature
addition to bring the method up to current levels, that may be easier then
starting the method from scratch.

We need some advice on how to move forward.

Ron

> -----Original Message-----
> From: tim Rowledge
> 
> 
> On 6-Dec-07, at 1:41 PM, goran at krampe.se wrote:
> 
> > Hi all!
> >
> > Ok, I admit totally missing/forgetting/not thinking about what
> > "rewrite"
> > had to mean.
> 
> Well, let's be honest here;  the only records we have are the author
> initials attached to methods. Each method may have many versions, or
> just one. Take a look at a few randomly and you'll notice that many
> versions are trivially different to preceeding versions. Who is the
> author? The last person to accept the method? The first? All of them?
> None?
> 
> 
> tim
> --
> tim Rowledge; tim at rowledge.org; http://www.rowledge.org/tim
> A fool and his money are soon partying
> 
>