Mailing-List: contact dev-help@community.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@community.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of bimargulies@gmail.com
 designates 74.125.82.170 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1112310337320.16833@urchin.earth.li>
References: <DD9692BD-1E27-45A8-8E80-6E42B6DA779E@jpl.nasa.gov>
	<CAM1yOjZHayPvdS=624xdKej3YMBXphTJCAFsVFNjUWNye0quZQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<15F56445-F5E3-4EBB-BAE4-71A7B973F294@jpl.nasa.gov>
	<CAKQbXgBj-txS6mpVMHvT7oF2PsS8gXNdDYDDmK_1odbdmJfpEw@mail.gmail.com>
	<983E76DE-3218-482D-B978-C1BD72A212B1@jpl.nasa.gov>
	<CAGU5spfo5zqk7wWwBcKy5pOisM39vHY4OhaqG1KnF6ARYCOb-A@mail.gmail.com>
	<1325190214.13347.YahooMailNeo@web27804.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>
	<0F2CB17A-FB5D-4BBE-9789-A115D12C60F2@jpl.nasa.gov>
	<1325191807.5131.YahooMailNeo@web27807.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>
	<CAKQbXgA-oOMGfQK-S7vdxT+ZpTA0aR2-mjKzWKFiwkXugZx21g@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGU5speYqVfFncBc4ZsjmarDuOSidwgXc1q=MJymNt4H1SKTgw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAKQbXgDyqnYfqdtCjvpfrRXpvouW4e0LGtvFYBvZOhTaujweCw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPFNckiTcN=whQq7OqHHfYtj0c_99U1o8GjVV6MJayLRd0QxWA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALhtWkcXXNeohKSe7tDjLP14vpJsjt+pe7iBRiPjG9PjoKPDUQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<alpine.DEB.2.00.1112310337320.16833@urchin.earth.li>
Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2011 10:06:54 -0500
Message-ID: 
 <CALhtWkdD-ooP+D9m1-OLrB=goa6X0sdiTjj-EdZrNbsDSTVtzQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Apache Extras Question
From: Benson Margulies <bimargulies@gmail.com>
To: dev@community.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 10:43 PM, Nick Burch <nick@apache.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Dec 2011, Benson Margulies wrote:
>>
>> Second, I wonder about the proposed governance and logic of this whole
>> 'java package id rules' business. Here's a scenario: someone from
>> outside Apache fills out the form, creates a project, and *forks some
>> Apache project into it.* Bingo, 'org.apache.*'. What group of
>> volunteers is signed up to notice and police this?
>
>
> Isn't that covered by clauses 4.2-4.4 and 6 of the license? I thought that
> if you forked an Apache licensed project, then you need to flag up the
> changes (4.2) and attribute where it came from (4.3/4.4), plus you're
> restricted in what you can call the fork (6).


4.2? http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.txt has 4 (a) - 4(d).
They concern redistribution. It's entirely unclear to me whether
forking the source constitutes redistribution. Even if it does, that
wouldn't change the question at hand. (6) is the trademark question,
which remains: is using an org.apache Java package name a usage of a
trademark, and if we took that attitude, where would we find 1000
monkeys on typewriters to create all the email complaining of
infringement?


>
> Nick