db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Geir Magnusson Jr. <ge...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Derby code copyright question
Date Sun, 26 Sep 2004 21:01:36 GMT

On Sep 26, 2004, at 3:45 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:

> Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>> I would like to see formal assignment of copyright to the ASF happen. 
>>   The concept of (c) completely held by the ASF is what distinguishes 
>> us  from pretty much everything else out there.  W/o that, I don't 
>> believe  that we can relicense anything, as an example, without a 
>> specific  side-agreement from each contributor for which a (c) is in 
>> the license  or notice file.  That's an administrative headache I'm 
>> not interested  in.
>
> You mean something like the following?
>
>       Grant of Copyright License. Subject to the terms and conditions
>       of this Agreement, You hereby grant to the Foundation and to
>       recipients of software distributed by the Foundation a perpetual,
>       worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable
>       copyright license to reproduce, prepare derivative works of,
>       publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, and distribute
>       Your Contributions and such derivative works.
>
> That's been included in the Software Grant and Contributor License 
> Agreements to date.

That's a license for the work, not a transfer of ownership of the 
copyright for the work.

>
> Hopefully, we can agree that the original contributor retains a 
> copyright on their original work.  In this case, I mean any copy of 
> CloudScape that existed prior to Derby.

It seems that we'd have to do a transfer and license back to IBM.

>
> Hopefully, we can agree that the ASF is free to assert a copyright on 
> any combined or derived works.  By that, I mean Derby.

There is no question we can assert copyright on the combined work, but 
that still means we are distributing what is [right now] ~100% (c) IBM 
code.

W/o transfer of copyright to the ASF, we'd simply be redistributing 
IBMs copyrighted work. I can certainly see the argument that it isn't 
so bad, as the software is under the AL2, but this is a departure from 
how we historically operate, or so we believed.

>
> The issue that we should be discussing whether the original copyright 
> holder has a right to license the code to the ASF conditional on a 
> NOTICE requirement.

I think that with any software grant, we certainly should mention the 
source in the NOTICE as a way of saying 'thanks!', but that we should 
require transfer of copyright to the ASF.

geir


>
> - Sam Ruby
>
-- 
Geir Magnusson Jr                                  +1-203-665-6437
geirm@apache.org


Mime
View raw message