← Back to context

Comment by X-Ryl669

5 days ago

That's true. And, in my understanding, what OO did, falls exactly in paragraph b and d. The license doesn't describe what is the "Appropriate Legal Notices" and OO provided a description for it: its logo and its trademark.

No, logos and trademarks are neither "legal notices" nor "author attributions". It's simply not what those words mean. A "legal notice" is some sort of legally relevant document. An "author attribution" is a plaintext recognition of the original copyright holder.

If you look at the repo, it looks like the did fail to include author attributions, as far as I can see. The source files need to say they were originally written by OO. That's what author attribution means.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attribution_(copyright)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Notice