archive-license mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nathanael Nerode <>
Subject Re: Proposed Apache License -- NOTICE section
Date Fri, 14 Nov 2003 01:26:37 GMT
>>>       (b) You must retain, in the source code of any Derivative Work
>>>           that You distribute, all copyright, patent, or trademark
>>>           notices from the source code of the Work,
This is basically fine.

>>> excluding those
>>>           notices that only pertain to portions of the Work that have
>>>           been excluded from the Derivative Work.
Apart from the comment I made in my last message about this phrase.

>>> If the Work includes a
>>>           "NOTICE" file as part of its source code distribution, the
>>>           Derivative Work must include a readable copy of the notices
>>>           contained within that NOTICE file,
No definition of a "notice".  Could be anything, here....

>>> excluding those notices
>>>           that only pertain to portions of the Work that have been
>>>           excluded from the Derivative Work, 
See my comment about this phrase in the previous message.

>>> in at least one of the
>>>           following places: within a NOTICE file distributed as part of
>>>           the Derivative Work; within the source code or documentation,
>>>           if provided along with the Derivative Work; or, within a
>>>           display generated by the Derivative Work, if and wherever 
>>> such
>>>           third-party notices normally appear. You may add Your own
>>>           notices alongside or as an addendum to the original NOTICE
>>>           information. The contents of the NOTICE file are for
>>>           informational purposes only and do not modify the terms and
>>>           conditions of this License.
So, uh, no copyright notices or trademark notices, right?  Those have 
non-informational purposes.

What is supposed to be in this NOTICE file anyway?...

These NOTICE requirements appear on the face of it to be 
GPL-incompatible (for any work which has a NOTICE file), since they add 
extra requirements.

Copyright notices can't be legally removed (from redistributed copies) 

Trademark notices are not required when using a trademark in a legal 
manner; the GPL doesn't require it, the FSF actually discourages it, and 
so this is probably another GPL incompatibility.

Really, what is the *purpose* of these changes?  I'm sure a better set 
of terms can be devised that accomplish the intended purpose without 
diving into this morass.

View raw message