Re: Copyright notice for contrib/cube?

Marti Raudsepp wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 17:42, Jay Levitt<jay(dot)levitt(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Should it be something like
>>
>> Portions Copyright (c) 1996-2011, PostgreSQL Global Development Group
>> Portions Copyright (c) 2012, TipTap Inc.
>
> Please don't add that, just change 2011 to 2012. This is what the wiki says:
>
> Q: May I add my own copyright notice where appropriate?

To clarify, this is for an extension to be distributed separately on PGXN
and GitHub, not for a contribution to the PostgreSQL distribution. It will
differ greatly from contrib/cube when it's done, but cube is the scaffolding
I'm starting with.

That said:

> Q: Doesn't the PostgreSQL license itself require to keep the copyright
> notice intact?
> A: Yes, it does. And it is, because the PostgreSQL Global Development
> Group covers all copyright holders.

Is that true for separately-distributed extensions as well - if I push this
to GitHub, my company is part of the PGDG? Where is the PGDG defined?

If not (and perhaps even if so), I think I could still add an additional
copyright notice without violating the license, since the copyright notice
and following two paragraphs still appear in all copies. But perhaps it's
not necessary.

I think the edge case is something stupid like "In five years, there is no
remaining contrib code, and we get bought by MonsantoOracleHalliburton, and
they want to close-source the code in a way that's somehow incompatible with
the PostgreSQL license.. can they?"

But that does raise two other points:

- cube seems to post-date any work at UC. Should I still include the
"Portions Copyright (c) 1994, The Regents of the University of California"?

- Technically, the license could be read such that "the above copyright
notice" (singular) refers to the UC copyright notice but not the PGDG
notice; next time the lawyers run through it, you might want to add an "s"
to "notices"..

Jay