Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (hermes.apache.org: local policy)
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE: What to do with FTPServer and AltRMI
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 18:54:38 -0800
Message-ID: <4C2F1577F2EF2840A9AE9EC61860C8810181F7F7@usseex01.amer.bea.com>
Thread-Topic: What to do with FTPServer and AltRMI
Thread-Index: AcTCD/kLzxhdGpwoRiaiL5LwdafdRQAB0CLQ
From: "Cliff Schmidt" <cliff@bea.com>
To: <general@incubator.apache.org>

Niclas Hedhman wrote on Wednesday, November 03, 2004 11:36 AM:

> On Thursday 04 November 2004 02:11, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
>=20
>>> What about code that was contributed during Incubation?
>>=20
>> They would have to obtain a license from the ASF to use that code,
>> or, in alternative, a license from each invididual contributor.
>> Since that license comes along with the files, if they like that
>> license, they are set.
>=20
> In fact, the ASL/CLA combo is a bit ambigous on these points as well,
> since it basically says;
> 1. The Copyright *owner* of any work is the producer of the Original
> Work.=20
> 2. Any contributor agrees that each and every part of contribution to
> the Original Work, becomes part of the Original Work.
>=20
> =3D I don't own my patches.

Not true.  There's no document stating that the ownership of=20
contributions are ever transferred; they are only licensed so that
the contribution can be included within an Apache product.  Whether=20
you are a committer or other contributor, you continue to own your
intellectual property.

> The ambiguities arises from 'what scope' is Original Work. Is it a
> single file? Is it more or is it less?

It is whatever you submit, whether that is a file, a set of files, or
a single patch to a file.

> Assuming it is a single file, in Aaron's example the JExample team
> could easily look at which files they originally contributed into the
> Incubator, and extract them back out and re-license without any
> additional assignments from other contributors.

yes, assuming they owned the copyright as the original creators of
the work (and without claims from some employer).

> If an entire project is considered Original Work (as is the case in
> Sun's licensing, which may or may not be relevant), then the entire
> project is could be re-licensed.

The 'entire project' would be considered as a collective work owned
by the ASF.  This doesn't mean the ASF owns the individual=20
contributions, just the copyright on the collection.  The individual
contributors definitely do not have the right to re-license the entire
project, unless they owned every piece of it.

> If it is 'less-than-a-file', it would be interesting to see how such
> definition is made.

It is defined by the patch that is checked-in by a committer or=20
contributed from someone else.  It is defined in the Apache License
as:=20
      "Contribution" shall mean any work of authorship, including
      the original version of the Work and any modifications or =
additions
      to that Work or Derivative Works thereof, that is intentionally
      submitted to Licensor for inclusion in the Work by the copyright =
owner
      or by an individual or Legal Entity authorized to submit on behalf =
of
      the copyright owner. For the purposes of this definition, =
"submitted"
      means any form of electronic, verbal, or written communication =
sent
      to the Licensor or its representatives, including but not limited =
to
      communication on electronic mailing lists, source code control =
systems,
      and issue tracking systems that are managed by, or on behalf of, =
the
      Licensor for the purpose of discussing and improving the Work, but
      excluding communication that is conspicuously marked or otherwise
      designated in writing by the copyright owner as "Not a =
Contribution."

> To make the case even more complicated, since the CLA covers the (2.)
> above, patches arriving from non-ASF committers are also "in limbo",
> since such contributor could say "I only contributed because it was
> ASL", and so on.=20

Since only committers are required to sign the CLA, contributions from
non-committers are covered by the Apache License v 2.0, which they must
accept if they exercise any of the rights granted in that license.  So,
the paragraph quoted above applies to them as well. =20

> And OTOH, although right should be right, I doubt it would ever be
> tried in court, and would I care if someone used a few hundred lines
> of my code without giving me credit or licensing it as GPL which I
> hate?? I wouldn't. Someone else with bigger ego than me maybe.
>=20
>=20
> Cheers
> Niclas

Cliff

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org