www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeffrey Thompson <jt...@us.ibm.com>
Subject RE: Comments on GPLv3
Date Fri, 15 Jun 2007 15:19:22 GMT
"Lawrence Rosen" <lrosen@rosenlaw.com> wrote on 06/14/2007 06:46:45 PM:

> So in the context of Noel's original question about the MySQL JDBC 
> driver, do you agree that there would be no license conflict even if
> we distribute verbatim copies of a GPLv3 driver upon which *our 
software* 
> depends, as long as that driver doesn't itself depend upon Apache code?

Yes, as long as Apache is shipping the GPLv3 driver under GPLv3, which 
means that the Apache package as a whole would no longer be licensed in 
such a way as to allow commercial relicensing.
> 
> Perhaps *our policies* impose different rules because of what you 
> call "license surprise", but there's not a license conflict in Noel's 
example.

Right.
> 
> That would be a nice parallel. GPLv3 software can depend upon Apache
> software because GPLv3 is now compatible with the Apache License. 
> And Apache software can depend on GPLv3 software because we're only 
> using verbatim copies in collective works. The world of FOSS is more
> compatible than ever.
> 
One way to look at it.  However, its also the case that Apache code can be 
taken and dropped in the middle of GPLv3 projects (since Apache's license 
is liberal and allows Derivative Works to be relicensed), but GPLv3 code 
cannot be taken and dropped into Apache projects, as the GPLv3 would 
require that the original Apache code be relicensed under GPLv3. 

I think that's a real concern that Apache needs to figure out how to 
handle.  Even though the FSF has declared GPLv3 and Apache to be 
compatible, the projects cannot cross-pollenate.  If a GPLv3 project takes 
some Apache code and evolves it, the Apache committers need to be on the 
lookout for people trying to contribute those changes back to Apache by 
mistake.  I don't know how they are going to do that since the code will 
likely still have the Apache copyright and license notice in it.  Has 
anyone thought about how to do that?

Jeff

Counsel, IBM Corporation  (914)766-1757  (tie)8-826  (fax) -8160
(notes) jthom@ibmus  (internet) jthom@us.ibm.com (home) jeff@beff.net
(web) http://www.beff.net/ 


Mime
View raw message