Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CA+ULb+t=QQWDsKA2nc-mc+nZ0Abkp0cpctdVrapoYWx=0vh0Bw@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CA+ULb+t=QQWDsKA2nc-mc+nZ0Abkp0cpctdVrapoYWx=0vh0Bw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2015 23:30:15 -0500
Message-ID: 
 <CACsi251H6j7um5JeXkjXqHGhcBRjCLqYa_jf4rqbuh1LQRAsRQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: What is the legal basis for enforcing release policies at ASF?
From: William A Rowe Jr <wrowe@rowe-clan.net>
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Cc: ComDev <dev@community.apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113eceacb41508051cb1171d

--001a113eceacb41508051cb1171d
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 7:50 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <roman@shaposhnik.org>
wrote:

> Hi!
>
> while answering a question on release policies and ALv2
> I've suddenly realized that I really don't know what is the
> legal basis for enforcing release policies we've got
> documented over here:
>    http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html
>
> For example, what would be the legal basis for stopping
> a 3d party from releasing a snapshot of ASF's project
> source tree and claim it to be a release X.Y.Z of said
> project?
>

Nothing other than the Trademarks.

If someone wants to call httpd trunk 3.0.1-GA, they cannot do this as
"Apache httpd 3.0.1-GA" or "Apache HTTP Server 3.0.1-GA".

They can certainly release trunk under the AL license and call it "Kindred
Http Server 3.0.1-GA, based on Apache HTTP Server". That is a statement of
fact and not an abuse of the mark, IMHO. (If it was not actually based on
Apache HTTP Server, then that would similarly be a Trademark infringement
as it is a false use of the mark.)

There are no less than two marks, one is the name of the foundation itself
in conjunction with Open Source Software, and the other is the specific
project name.

--001a113eceacb41508051cb1171d--