Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8E91518A83 for ; Fri, 7 Aug 2015 11:55:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 72655 invoked by uid 500); 7 Aug 2015 11:55:13 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 72463 invoked by uid 500); 7 Aug 2015 11:55:12 -0000 Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list general@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 72451 invoked by uid 99); 7 Aug 2015 11:55:12 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO spamd1-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 07 Aug 2015 11:55:12 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd1-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd1-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 21C40DB439 for ; Fri, 7 Aug 2015 11:55:12 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd1-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 3.001 X-Spam-Level: *** X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.001 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd1-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mx1-us-west.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd1-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.7]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KK6nHM2WJmNV for ; Fri, 7 Aug 2015 11:55:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-lb0-f182.google.com (mail-lb0-f182.google.com [209.85.217.182]) by mx1-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 34F652092B for ; Fri, 7 Aug 2015 11:55:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: by lbbpo9 with SMTP id po9so59654210lbb.2 for ; Fri, 07 Aug 2015 04:54:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=a25AkrvK+tk4rZtmlC4NH+Gda8YA5RrpUL1nItoYsUk=; b=tdN0OSdpqm1rMVBDVoo0qEcRwkvPiWck7bCUUkGTavHe+r6Qbj6WXEq8/lPsu+xJ+/ /QVLsB9ftGYnJ/ERNkPYgh8GLVimzEcb9w+TX0y35vtStpT4CcjOv4K89aEF41xJtjOa JIVs1rKnHk2b5Y8jTMp6y0r0kkw4E1OXpyOyYfgJHWeiDoAvyLJhAJZ9u/7SxaWwhFWP O09hCgEkKmcSe1Ff+XW197L2Z9M149eY6eOKDg/dNdQQ8TEktsgXul9Nu6Wf94LiHBeF 0dx8XDiemxcfBLsy2Mwjz82vYYcDvpthkW7Q8ZU7+Rpk0t0SHaXFY9xmMiEUf6TkX/2u bV/A== X-Received: by 10.152.28.194 with SMTP id d2mr7170523lah.122.1438948456595; Fri, 07 Aug 2015 04:54:16 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: hedhman@gmail.com Received: by 10.25.148.84 with HTTP; Fri, 7 Aug 2015 04:53:57 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Niclas Hedhman Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2015 19:53:57 +0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: osLaUOIK9X9IyPucho8QSak6Uo8 Message-ID: Subject: Re: What is the legal basis for enforcing release policies at ASF? To: dev@community.apache.org Cc: "general@incubator.apache.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0160b4209b08cd051cb74b5e --089e0160b4209b08cd051cb74b5e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Bill, So I can release "Niclas Hadoop platform, based on Apache Hadoop" ?? I thought the discussion a few years ago was that this was misleading... On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 12:30 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 7:50 PM, Roman Shaposhnik > 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. > -- Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer http://zest.apache.org - New Energy for Java --089e0160b4209b08cd051cb74b5e--