[Reuse] Where to put a licence header

[Reinhard Müller]

Hi, all!

Please let me add one thought:

Am 08.04.19 um 11:52 schrieb Max Mehl:
> But what about a Dockerfile (like [^2]). IANAL, but it seems like such
> simple instructions do not meet the threshold of originality. Do they
> still need license header? And would that rather be a code licence like
> GPL, or a content licence like CC?

IANAL as well, but I think a very central question is what constitutes a
separate work, and what is one big work.

Based on the assumption that the splitting of source code into separate
files should not influence its copyrightability, I would assume that all
files belonging to the same work are covered by the copyright of the
work, even if the content of the file itself may be trivial.

Of course the question remains whether the instructions to build,
configure, test, install, or deploy a program are part of the program
(i.e. one and the same work), or they constitue separate works.

Thanks,
-- 
Reinhard Müller * Financial Team
Free Software Foundation Europe

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/private/reuse/attachments/20190408/c5c981a2/attachment.sig>