Re: When we detect that a 16550 was in fact part of a NatSemi SuperIO chip

[Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>]

On Sun, 2005-05-22 at 19:44 +0100, Russell King wrote:
> On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 08:14:06PM +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > On Sun, 2005-05-22 at 09:59 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > > 
> > > On Sun, 22 May 2005, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > Linus, please do not apply patches from me which have my personal
> > > > information mangled or removed.
> > > 
> > > I've asked Russell not to do it, but the fact is, he's worried about legal 
> > > issues, and while I've also tried to resolve those (by having the OSDL 
> > > lawyer try to contact some lawyers in the UK), that hasn't been clarified 
> > > yet.
> > 
> > there is a potential nasty interaction with the UK moral rights thing
> > where an author can demand that his authorship claim remains intact...
> > so if David objects to his authorship being mangled (and partially
> > removed) he may have a strong legal position to do so.
> 
> Actually, that only depends on whether you decide that Signed-off-by:
> reflects authorship.


author David Woodhouse <dwmw2@org.rmk.(none)> Sat, 21 May 2005 15:52:23 +0100

that looks far more like an authorship statement and is also munged.