Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:34202
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 64.233.162.232 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Status: bad
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references;
        b=QTK1xbspmfrmNZV3zwf+p60gNzm4o8bGAaLAW+liW1JVJrhMWRKh5u/ncr2pdfDLoOfgA7sbTSWZSPwjP7nuIkBMbPb4hde5H+aSdE/SO+Y8ddiiBs0bBSprCGy1U7VrDg78q0R3G4h06vwZ1/cvAZS6U2F9yxcnCW/yXToHP0Q=
Message-ID: <52dbac0f0712210529l6a78f554j9482b1116fa3039c@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2007 10:29:35 -0300
To: "Alexey Zakhlestin" <indeyets@gmail.com>
Cc: internals@lists.php.net
In-Reply-To: <cd5680a20712210155p35327563u1ddc2975f417024d@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; 
	boundary="----=_Part_469_31085866.1198243775101"
References: <20071209010552.GA12561@openwall.com> <476B0872.3060408@zend.com>
	 <52dbac0f0712201815t3b8d4d7do85980100a26e1609@mail.gmail.com>
	 <cd5680a20712210155p35327563u1ddc2975f417024d@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] faster & public domain MD5 implementation
From: malterisio777@gmail.com ("Martin Alterisio")

------=_Part_469_31085866.1198243775101
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

No, public domain isn't recognized by copyright law as a copyright notice.
An extra line should be added that says something like "no copyright is
claimed", and attach a year range where the copyright is in effect (since
copyright expires, if I remember correctly). Anyway, the keyword here is
"copyright", which is recognized internationally (which means you should use
this word even if writing the copyright notice in another language).

Without a copyright notice, the code isn't apt for distribution. The author
could claim that he did not give his consent for public distribution and
that the code was an in-house development. Anyway, it's too complicate and I
understand very little. To get the real facts here, you should talk to your
lawyer.

2007/12/21, Alexey Zakhlestin <indeyets@gmail.com>:
>
> isn't "public domain" specific enough?
>
> On 12/21/07, Martin Alterisio <malterisio777@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 2007/12/20, Stanislav Malyshev <stas@zend.com>:
> > >
> > > > Attached is a quick patch for PHP 5.2.5 that replaces RSA's
> copyrighted
> > > > implementation of MD5 with my public domain one:
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> http://cvsweb.openwall.com/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/Owl/packages/popa3d/popa3d/md5/
> > >
> > > Tried that one and it is about 30% faster indeed (on md5-only
> benchmark,
> > > 32-bit Linux on AMD Opteron. Anybody objects to accepting this?
> > >
> > >
> > Just one, but is a mere formality. I didn't see any copyright notice on
> the
> > code nor a licensing document attached. I have not much of the legal
> > mumbo-jumbo comprehension, so, correct me if I'm wrong, shouldn't
> external
> > code that's to be included in the php codebase meet these legal
> formalities
> > so it doesn't become a liability?
> >
> > That's all.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> >
> > Martin Alterisio
> >
> > PS: Does anyone knows if using a nickname for authorship is considered
> > legally valid? I believe it might be valid, think about writers that use
> > such pseudonyms, but I'm not sure...
> >
>
>
> --
> Alexey Zakhlestin
> http://blog.milkfarmsoft.com/
>

------=_Part_469_31085866.1198243775101--