incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From robert burrell donkin <robertburrelldon...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report
Date Sun, 31 Jul 2005 14:08:04 GMT
On 7/31/05, Sam Ruby <rubys@apache.org> wrote:
> robert burrell donkin wrote:
> > On 7/31/05, Geir Magnusson Jr. <geirm@apache.org> wrote:

<snip>

> > with the ASL2, apache is covered through the license but AIUI this
> > does not extend to sublicensing. personally speaking, i do not accept
> > new files contributed through the lists which do not have the ASL2
> > boiler plate at the top. this way is common at apache. it is very
> > difficult to see how a user posting code with a specific license to a
> > mailing list is given knowing consent for that license to be removed
> > and replaced by a different license by a third party. it all seems a
> > little fuzzy legally.
> 
> IANAL, but I have read the Apache License.
> 
> I'd suggest that you take a look at section 5 of the Apache License,
> Version 2.0.  It is one paragraph, and not particularly dense.  "any
> Contribution intentionally submitted for inclusion in the Work by You to
> the Licensor shall be under the terms and conditions of this License,
> without any additional terms or conditions."
> 
> If that isn't specific enough, take a look at the definition of
> "Contribution" in section 1.  "including but not limited to
> communication on electronic mailing lists, source code control systems,
> and issue tracking systems"
> 
> And, what are the "terms and conditions of this License"?  Section 2
> grants licensees the right to sublicense the copyrights held by each
> Contributor.

went away and looked up when sublicensing actually means legally. i
was using the term wrongly. apologies for the confusion.
 
> Unless you can figure out a way to explain how somebody can submit a
> patch to software without being aware of the license for that software,
> then this isn't very fuzzy to me.  At all.

i agree that the ASL is clear. 

the fuzziness i meant was the idea of a default license for a mailing
list. it's less clear that a user would reasonably expect that a patch
submitted for an apache project might end up being licensed under the
GPL (given that the FSF believes that ASL2 to be incompatible). IMHO
they'd need to give informed consent.

- robert

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


Mime
View raw message