incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [WEBPAGES][LICENSING] Do we need to put the ALv2 license header on top of our webpages (*.html, *.js *.css) ?
Date Sun, 17 Jun 2012 23:37:23 GMT
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 7:51 PM, Kay Schenk <kay.schenk@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 5:23 PM, Dave Fisher <dave2wave@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On May 31, 2012, at 7:57 PM, Rob Weir <robweir@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> > On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 7:06 PM, Marcus (OOo) <marcus.mail@wtnet.de>
>> wrote:
>> >> Hi license experts, all,
>> >>
>> >> I'm just wondering if it's necessary to label our webpages with the ALv2
>> >> header.
>> >>
>> >
>> > If you look at our project webpages (those at
>> > incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg) you see that they do all have the
>> > ALv2 stated in a comment in the <head>.
>> >
>> > That is because all of those pages are new, written in the podling, by
>> > committers.
>> >
>> > For legacy pages at www.openoffice.org, including the wiki, we cannot
>> > assume the legacy content is ALv2.  It is generally under a range of
>> > licenses.  But for new content, added by project committers, checked
>> > in via Subversion, I think it should be declared as ALv2.  That would
>> > agree with the iCLA.
>> >
>> >> At least for our JavaScript files I could think of that it is suitable
>> as it
>> >> is kind of code? Or also for CSS files? All webpage files?
>> >>
>> >
>> > Anything that can be copyrighted can have the ALv2 license added.
>> > But to be honest, I have not really paid attention to this for new web
>> > pages.  And since the website is not included in our release, none of
>> > this gets audited.   But I can see it would be a "good thing" if we
>> > did this more consistently.
>>
>> This is my understanding. It will be good to change the mdtext in the
>> OOo-site. The old html content was copied and it is not going to be a
>> problem according to the information I received.
>>
>> If you look at the svn you will see that it was Kay and I did the bulk of
>> these commits with minimal adjustment. There are scripts that were used to
>> do the work.
>>
>> If we want to insert the al2 banner on every page then there are ways to
>> do it with templates or ssi.
>>
>> When I did this initially in the OOo site was told not to by Dennis. IIRC
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dave
>>
>
> I'd like to reopen this old thread for a bit.
>
> Dave, do you know why Dennis told you not to do this?
>

Presumably because the pages were not under the Apache License.

But let's back up.

The SGA from Oracle put the OOo source code under Alv2.  It did
nothing to the content on the website/wiki/forums.  That stuff all
remains under whatever license it was before.  As we know, this was a
mix of licenses.

Now what we can probably do is put an ASF copyright on the entire
site.  Note that we do this on the podling website, where we say on
every page: "Copyright © 2011-2012 The Apache Software Foundation
Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0"

The idea there is that the arrangement and selection of content is
itself a creative act, and can be copyrighted  This is similar to how
an anthology of poetry can have a copyright by the anthologist, as
well as copyrights by the individual poets.

But in the case of the openoffice.org website, the license for the
individual pages is under various other licenses.  So giving a proper
notice for this is tricky.  We cannot remove existing copyright or
license statements.

Ideally, we want to make it clear to the reader which license applies
to which pages.  This could be either within the pages itself, or some
aggregated list (similar to what we do in our NOTICE file).

But maybe we want to back up even further:  What are we trying to fix?
 Is there something about the website now that is not satisfactory?
Is there something someone wants to do that they cannot do?

> I think when we (you and I) were first porting things over, you had some
> concerns -- or rather tracked down -- that the pages were PDL, a license
> Sun created.
>
> ref:
> http://www.openoffice.org/licenses/PDL.html
>
> So, do we basically think that anyone (any one of us or anyone else) can
> use/modify the content of these pages according to this license?
>

IANAL, but the ICLA which all committers signed says that
contributions are made under ALv2.

-Rob

>
>> >
>> >> Would be great to get opinions from our license gurus. :-)
>> >>
>> >> Thanks in advance.
>> >>
>> >> Marcus
>>
>
>
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> MzK
>
> "There's no crying in baseball!"
>       -- Jimmy Dugan (Tom Hanks), "A League of Their Own"

Mime
View raw message