httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Ralf S. Engelschall" <>
Subject Re: ASF and licensing
Date Tue, 06 Jul 1999 15:47:58 GMT

In article <> you wrote:

> [...]
> In other words: the ASF licenses Apache to the commercial world for a good
> price when they want a special licensed Apache. Not such a lot of money other
> commercial software would cost, but at least money the ASF this way receives
> and which is important for making conferences, etc. 
> [...]

Ops, someone pointed out in a private mail that it's not such easy because of
the contributors. They contribute under the umbrella of the current license,
so unless they explicitly gave up their rights to the copyright holder, it is
not possible for him to really "re-license" the product at a _later_ stage
under a totally different license (one needs the ok of all contributors). Ok,
some harmless license exceptions, as I mentioned for instance for the tarball
inclusion problem, are usually no problem. 

But I've to admit that I've totally overlooked this subtle but very important
point in my argumentation. We concluded that it might be possible to solve
this issue for a dictator driven project, but obviously is mostly impossible
for a group effort and especially for one with lots of contributors. So, yes,
at this point I've already to admit that my pro-LGPL argumentation is
weak.  OTOH it applies to any re-license situation in the free software
world and isn't only related to LGPL itself IMHO.

Hmmm... yes, the whole license topic is very complicated and it seems nobody
ever has found a general solution which makes all parties happy :-( I've at
least to admit that my scetched LGPL situation also cannot solve the world, of
                                       Ralf S. Engelschall

View raw message