www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Noel J. Bergman" <n...@devtech.com>
Subject RE: Apache's LGPL Policy
Date Wed, 03 Aug 2005 04:35:33 GMT
Cliff Schmidt wrote:

> Actually, I did manage to get the FSF to even agree that distributing
> a single .jar that contains both the Apache-developed program and
> LGPL-licensed library would not have any impact on how we could
> license the Apache stuff.  In fact, a strong argument can be made that
> the single .jar is simply a collective work that can be licensed
> however we like (e.g. Apache)

> So, if Apache continues to have a policy that does not allow
> distribution of components that require licensing terms
> beyond those stated in the Apache License v.2, then we can't
> do co-distribution.

Said policy does not and never has existed, therefore it cannot be
"continued", since continuation requires prior existence.  It was discussed,
and repeatedly pointed out that such a policy would make it impossible to
ship all but the most trivial Java programs.  Tomcat, JAMES, and others, for
example, all have dependencies upon Sun packages, e.g., JavaMail, JAF, etc.
We do have to put the licensing information into the NOTICE.TXT file,
though.

	--- Noel


---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only, are not privileged and do not constitute legal advice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org


Mime
View raw message