cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Andrew C. Oliver" <acoli...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [LAW] Quick Lesson in Copyright Law (was RE: copyright for docs [was: Re: [Bugs] URLSource])
Date Mon, 20 May 2002 16:33:36 GMT
Diana Shannon wrote:

>
> On Monday, May 20, 2002, at 11:56  AM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
>
>>> Then, in effect, the copyright terms for docs will be stricter than 
>>> the revised copyright terms proposed for code, as per Stefano's 
>>> email, which stated "GPL code can use Apache code". In other words, 
>>> why wouldn't we want a potential GPL project to "use" (revise,  
>>> distribute) Apache docs, as long as the project makes such 
>>> modifications available? Why should docs be treated differently than 
>>> code under Stefano's new proposal?
>>
>>
>>
>> Umm...no.   IANAL....but... to my understanding, as explained GPL 
>> project could use revise, distribute Apache docs.  They're be 
>> released under APL.  The difference being depending on the 
>> benevolence of many individuals or the ASF itself.  For instance, 
>> currently, any docs I have donated that I feel I still hold the 
>> rights to I could suddenly decide all projects that distribute them 
>> (GPL or not) need to pay me a nickle a copy (where copy is defined as 
>> a unique copy of my documentation on any location on a hard drive.  I 
>> could require the ASF, you and anyone else who downloaded Cocoon and 
>> has a copy to play me for my documentation work.
>
>
> No, you couldn't do this, as long as you you granted the ASF a 
> "non-exclusive, irrevocable, worldwide, no-charge, transferable 
> copyright license"  (as per Berin's link: 
> http://jakarta.apache.org/site/agreement.html). In your example, 
> "no-charge" and "transferable" are the key words.

True.. . If I were not a committer I could though.  Those submitting 
patches do not generally sign that agreement.

>
> We're talking about two separate copyright issues here, and it's 
> potentially confusing. One is the copyright terms governing 
> contributions which I believe Berin has clarified with his links. The 
> other is the implications of Stefano's proposal on how documentation, 
> included in Cocoon, can be used by third parties. On that issue, I'm 
> still a bit confused...
>
> Diana
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
>
>




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org


Mime
View raw message