httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefan Eissing <stefan.eiss...@greenbytes.de>
Subject Fwd: JSON License and Apache Projects
Date Tue, 23 May 2017 17:26:57 GMT
Just to be certain: does this impact any linkage against a JSON C library?


Anfang der weitergeleiteten E‑Mail:

> Von: Chris Mattmann <mattmann@apache.org>
> Datum: 23. Mai 2017 um 19:11:38 MESZ
> An: <legal-discuss@apache.org>
> Betreff: Wtr:⁨ JSON License and Apache Projects⁩
> Antwort an: private@httpd.apache.org
> 
> Dear PMCs@,
> 
> Hi! As the new Legal VP, I am reminding everyone that the
> grandfather exception for the JSON License and Apache projects
> ended last month. As sent by Jim (our prior Legal VP) the relevant
> text is below and I want to highlight the following statement:
> 
> --
> If you have been using it, and have done so in a *release*, AND there has
> been NO pushback from your community/eco-system, you have a temporary
> exclusion from the Cat-X classification thru April 30, 2017. At that point in time,
> ANY and ALL usage of these JSON licensed artifacts are DISALLOWED.
> --
> 
> Thank you for your consideration and attention to this
> matter.
> 
> 
> Cheers,
> Chris Mattmann, VP, Legal ASF
> 
> 
> From: Jim Jagielski <jim@jaguNET.com>
> Reply-To: "legal-discuss@apache.org" <legal-discuss@apache.org>
> Date: Tuesday, May 23, 2017 at 9:04 AM
> To: legal discuss <legal-discuss@apache.org>
> Subject: Fwd: JSON License and Apache Projects
> 
> 
> Begin forwarded message:
> 
> From: Jim Jagielski <jim@apache.org>
> Subject: JSON License and Apache Projects
> Date: November 23, 2016 at 9:10:39 AM EST
> To: ASF Board <board@apache.org>
> Reply-To: board@apache.org
> Message-Id: <B56ABB21-9954-44CC-AA3D-693EE2BBAE5C@apache.org>
> 
> 
> (forwarded from legal-discuss@)
> 
> As some of you may know, recently the JSON License has been
> moved to Category X (https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved#category-x).
> 
> I understand that this has impacted some projects, especially
> those in the midst of doing a release. I also understand that
> up until now, really, there has been no real "outcry" over our
> usage of it, especially from end-users and other consumers of
> our projects which use it.
> 
> As compelling as that is, the fact is that the JSON license
> itself is not OSI approved and is therefore not, by definition,
> an "Open Source license" and, as such, cannot be considered as
> one which is acceptable as related to categories.
> 
> Therefore, w/ my VP Legal hat on, I am making the following
> statements:
> 
> o No new project, sub-project or codebase, which has not
>  used JSON licensed jars (or similar), are allowed to use
>  them. In other words, if you haven't been using them, you
>  aren't allowed to start. It is Cat-X.
> 
> o If you have been using it, and have done so in a *release*,
>  AND there has been NO pushback from your community/eco-system,
>  you have a temporary exclusion from the Cat-X classification thru
>  April 30, 2017. At that point in time, ANY and ALL usage
>  of these JSON licensed artifacts are DISALLOWED. You must
>  either find a suitably licensed replacement, or do without.
>  There will be NO exceptions.
> 
> o Any situation not covered by the above is an implicit
>  DISALLOWAL of usage.
> 
> Also please note that in the 2nd situation (where a temporary
> exclusion has been granted), you MUST ensure that NOTICE explicitly
> notifies the end-user that a JSON licensed artifact exists. They
> may not be aware of it up to now, and that MUST be addressed.
> 
> If there are any questions, please ask on the legal-discuss@a.o
> list.
> 
> --
> Jim Jagielski
> VP Legal Affairs
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Mime
View raw message