httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrew Wilson <>
Subject Are 1.3R and 1.4 licenced properly?
Date Thu, 06 Apr 1995 10:00:37 GMT

 some members of the Apache development group would like a little
 clarification of the distribution terms of the current NCSA software
 (versions 1.3R and the 1.4 betas).  Basically, the problem is that
 the only legalese in the distribution is a README file which refers
 to "this code", without saying exactly *which* code is covered by the
 licensing language.

 So, if you could do something to eliminate the ambiguity, either by
 incorporating the legalese from the README files into a block comment
 at the top of the actual source files, or just putting a comment at
 the top of each saying that they are under the terms and conditions
 from the README, we'd really appreciate it.

 One of the reasons this comes up is that some of us actually have
 code which is part of 1.4, and we want it to be clear that we retain
 the right to use the code ourselves as we see fit, even if NCSA
 changes the terms of its own distribution as of some future version
 (2.x).  Keeping the code public domain is fine --- that allows either
 you or us to do anything at all with it in the future (including
 redistributing it on different terms).  We just want it to be plain
 that all the code in the *current* distribution is fully PD.

 (Incidentally, whatever ambiguity applies to the copyright terms also
 applies to the liability disclaimers --- i.e., the part which says
 "if it blows up, it's on your nickel, not NCSA's".  It might help to
 point that out to the lawyers if they give you any grief over this.
 Thanks again).

We'd really appreciate hearing your comments on this sooner rather
than later. ;)  Please feel free to copy this message to anyone who you
think would be interested.


     Andrew Wilson	     URL:
Elsevier Science, Oxford   Office: +44 01865 843155    Mobile: +44 0589 616144

View raw message