Copyrights, Org, etc.

[mubaldino]

Minor points:

• "Org" in pom.xml -- should we be changing this to be "OpenSextant" instead of "MITRE"? This should be more consistent across all modules.

• Files created after 2013 and by non-MITRE efforts: This should be marked with the proper NOTICE and Copyright header. This file was created in sustainment of StT, by you David. Not under a MITRE contract.
  https://github.com/OpenSextant/SolrTextTagger/blob/master/src/main/java/org/opensextant/solrtexttagger/TaggingAttributeImpl.java

As I say, minor points; but trying to get a handle on doing this properly and regularly.
thanks,
marc

[dsmiley]

I suggest simply removing the <organization> if there is any doubt. It's debatable; there is no actual OpenSextant organization.

RE Copyright: It's not clear to me how to handle this. Anyone who contributes new code and places a copyright notice on it that is MITRE is effectively granting MITRE copyright. I do this quite deliberately; I want a single entity to have all copyrights to the whole body of code as it makes some IP issues easier. (BTW copyright isn't necessarily exclusive; so I can do whatever with new code files I contribute). For example, AFAIK if MITRE wanted to rename the project, it can do so without asking every contributor who was external. Likewise for a re-license. But of course IANAL; this stuff gets confusing. I'm curious what MITRE's IP people think.

Perhaps it doesn't make sense to include this on code contributed outside of MITRE:

  This software was produced for the U. S. Government
  under Contract No. W15P7T-11-C-F600, and is
  subject to the Rights in Noncommercial Computer Software
  and Noncommercial Computer Software Documentation
  Clause 252.227-7014 (JUN 1995)

And by the way, the meaning of this confuses myself and others. I met someone at the last Lucene/Solr Revolution (Oct 2016) who worked at some big company and said he couldn't use the tagger because his corp's lawyers saw this statement and interpreted it to mean that only non-profit entities may use this software. Since this is not what MITRE means to convey, it would be great if somewhere that could be expressly debunked, like in the NOTICE.txt file. It would also be nice if the source files didn't need to have this header, particularly since some are to have them and some not, but that may be wishful thinking on my part.