> 1) What sort of changes grant someone copyright over a piece of code? This is a major > point of disagreement between Haze and most of the other developers I've heard from. > From what I've read, I tend to disagree with Haze on this question, but I am not a > lawyer...
We already have a document that covers this.
> 2) What should be done in the case that a contributor judged to have copyright is > anonymous or simply can't be contacted? Must the code be replaced, or is public > notice sufficient?
I believe we would replace it.
> 3) If code must be replaced, either due to the answer to question 2) or because a > contributor outright refuses to relicense code, how can you ensure this is done > without violating copyright?
This is all pretty well documented if you use google.
Paying a lawyer who knows nothing about software development to use google seems like a waste.
> 4) Are their any potential complications from the international nature of the > project, with contributions coming from all over the globe, and in some cases the > nationality of contributors not even known?
Berne copyright convention is pretty universal. For those that aren't, a local lawyer is not going to know about them anyway.
> 5) Can and should MAMEdev create a legal entity to assign copyright of the project to > once the relicensing is complete, so that any future licensing changes are simpler? > What's the best way to go about doing this?
The only way relicensing would be simpler is if we assigned copyright and that isn't going to happen.