incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net>
Subject Re: What is the legal basis for enforcing release policies at ASF?
Date Fri, 21 Aug 2015 03:19:44 GMT
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 8:52 AM, Jim Jagielski <jim@jagunet.com> wrote:

>
> A snapshot is not a release. Licenses "kick in" at distribution/
> release.
>

Lets just imagine if Jim, VP Legal is actually correct in his
interpretation, and that there are no AL 2.0 licenses applicable to our
source code repositories, svn or git.

Quoting http://apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 ...

2. Grant of Copyright License. Subject to the terms and conditions of this
License, each Contributor hereby grants to You a perpetual, worldwide,
non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable copyright license to
reproduce, prepare Derivative Works of, publicly display, publicly perform,
sublicense, and distribute the Work and such Derivative Works in Source or
Object form.

No, you may not modify the sources or derive those that reside within
version control of the ASF, until and upon the time when the project has
blessed that project as a release.  Patches to others' contributions to
source code control are not within the scope of this imaginary non-license
application.

3. Grant of Patent License. Subject to the terms and conditions of this
License, each Contributor hereby grants to You a perpetual, worldwide,
non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable (except as stated in
this section) patent license to make, have made, use, offer to sell, sell,
import, and otherwise transfer the Work, where such license applies only to
those patent claims licensable by such Contributor that are necessarily
infringed by their Contribution(s) alone or by combination of their
Contribution(s) with the Work to which such Contribution(s) was submitted.
If You institute patent litigation against any entity (including a
cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit) alleging that the Work or a
Contribution incorporated within the Work constitutes direct or
contributory patent infringement, then any patent licenses granted to You
under this License for that Work shall terminate as of the date such
litigation is filed.

No, you may absolutely not test the code that has been committed to source
control without a patent license, which you do not have, until that time
when the ASF blesses the work and calls it a release.

4. Redistribution. You may reproduce and distribute copies of the Work or
Derivative Works thereof in any medium, with or without modifications, and
in Source or Object form

None of that, it's all straight out, none of it applies to your work at the
ASF until the release is blessed.  That includes passing off a patched fork
of a security fix to a reporter who claimed there was a defect in the
earlier release.

5. Submission of Contributions. Unless You explicitly state otherwise, any
Contribution intentionally submitted for inclusion in the Work by You to
the Licensor shall be under the terms and conditions of this License

Except when it isn't in Ross's and our VP Legal's own minds...

6. Trademarks. This License does not grant permission to use the trade
names, trademarks, service marks, or product names of the Licensor, except
as required for reasonable and customary use in describing the origin of
the Work and reproducing the content of the NOTICE file.

Which wasn't a right in the first place, so no change here under any
interpretation...

7. Disclaimer of Warranty. Unless required by applicable law or agreed to
in writing, Licensor provides the Work (and each Contributor provides its
Contributions) on an "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
KIND, either express or implied, including, without limitation, any
warranties or conditions of TITLE, NON-INFRINGEMENT, MERCHANTABILITY, or
FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. You are solely responsible for
determining the appropriateness of using or redistributing the Work and
assume any risks associated with Your exercise of permissions under this
License.

Except that perhaps the ASF is liable, under our VP Legal's interpretation,
for works which do reside in source control and were not, in fact, released
to the general public?  [Ad nauseam 8. and 9.]

Let's just not go this direction, because it is plainly false. Jim, it
would truly be helpful if you spoke up for or in contradiction to your
earlier statements, here...

Cheers,

Bill

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message