www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Craig L Russell <Craig.Russ...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: Distribution of CDDL licensed xsd and dtd files
Date Thu, 02 Aug 2007 03:16:34 GMT
Hi Larry,

In Cliff's draft, there is an assumption that source code is intended  
to be modified, and therefore source code licensed under the CDDL is  
suspect.

The issue for specification dtd and xsd files is that they lose their  
value when modified, in that they no longer reflect the specification  
for which they are issued. So it's not clear how your definition  
"preferred form of the Original Work for making modifications" would  
apply.

Therefore, I have suggested that it is useful to treat specification  
xsd and dtd files licensed under CDDL as if they were binary, using  
the definition of binary as "not intended to be modified".

I'm hoping that at some point here, we can all agree that  
specification CDDL-licensed xsd and dtd files are redistributable in  
Apache bundles. And that Sam and Cliff can agree on the rationale for  
doing so and incorporate the reasoning into the official 3party  
policy. So we don't have to have this discussion every few months.

Craig

On Aug 1, 2007, at 8:08 PM, Lawrence Rosen wrote:

> I read and reviewed Cliff's draft many months ago and thought it  
> was very
> nice. I hope I don't have to read it again soon. :-)
>
> My point was only this: The definition of source code is sometimes  
> confusing
> in our industry. Here's how I define it in OSL/AFL 3.0, and there are
> similar definitions in other licenses: "The term 'Source Code'  
> means the
> preferred form of the Original Work for making modifications to it  
> and all
> available documentation describing how to modify the Original Work."
>
> That totally eliminates any consideration about programming  
> "landscape" or
> whether humans (or even human lawyers) can actually read the code. It
> doesn't really matter how these works are to be used, whether  
> compiled or
> interpreted or in some other form. As long as ASF has the rights we  
> need to
> those copyrighted works, and enough "source code" to make it  
> possible for
> appropriate humans with appropriate skills to do what we want with  
> them, we
> can put those works into any form we find convenient to us and to our
> customers.
>
> /Larry
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Craig.Russell@Sun.COM [mailto:Craig.Russell@Sun.COM]
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2007 6:29 PM
>> To: lrosen@rosenlaw.com
>> Cc: legal-discuss@apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Distribution of CDDL licensed xsd and dtd files
>>
>> Hi Larry,
>>
>> Perhaps it would be good for you to comment on this:
>>
>> http://people.apache.org/~cliffs/3party.html
>>
>> This is the working draft of Apache's third party license policy.
>> CDDL license is included in the discussion. Since dtd and xsd files
>> are neither strictly source nor binary, Sam Ruby has an action item
>> to resolve where in the landscape xsd and dtd files fall.
>>
>> These files are source because humans can read them. They are binary
>> because they are not compiled; they are used "as is" in deployed
>> applications. They are neither source nor binary because they are not
>> compiled but they are human-readable. The envelope please...
>>
>> Craig
>>
>> On Aug 1, 2007, at 6:13 PM, Lawrence Rosen wrote:
>>
>>> As long as it is copyrighted, then why the concern about whether  
>>> it is
>>> source or binary? Whatever form it is in is the form you got. Call
>>> that
>>> "source". Did you get enough source to satisfy ASF policies and  
>>> needs,
>>> including to pass on enough information to enable Apache licenses
>>> to do what
>>> they need with the software downstream?
>>>
>>> /Larry
>>>
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Kevan Miller [mailto:kevan.miller@gmail.com]
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2007 4:59 PM
>>>> To: lrosen@rosenlaw.com
>>>> Cc: legal-discuss@apache.org; 'William A. Rowe, Jr.'
>>>> Subject: Re: Distribution of CDDL licensed xsd and dtd files
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Aug 1, 2007, at 7:28 PM, Lawrence Rosen wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> xsd/dtd files are classified as neither source nor binary files.
>>>>>> Since the schemas are not source files, Apache policy restricting
>>>>>> inclusion of CDDL source files do not apply.
>>>>>
>>>>> Are they copyrighted works?
>>>>
>>>> Yes. Here is an example -- http://java.sun.com/xml/ns/javaee/ejb-
>>>> jar_3_0.xsd
>>>>
>>>> Excerpted from this file:
>>>>
>>>> <xsd:documentation>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        DO NOT ALTER OR REMOVE COPYRIGHT NOTICES OR THIS HEADER.
>>>>
>>>>        Copyright 2003-2007 Sun Microsystems, Inc. All rights
>>>> reserved.
>>>>
>>>>        The contents of this file are subject to the terms of
>>>> either the
>>>>        GNU General Public License Version 2 only ("GPL") or the
>>>> Common
>>>>        Development and Distribution License("CDDL") (collectively,
>>>> the
>>>>        "License").  You may not use this file except in compliance
>>>> with
>>>>        the License. You can obtain a copy of the License at
>>>>        https://glassfish.dev.java.net/public/CDDL+GPL.html or
>>>>        glassfish/bootstrap/legal/LICENSE.txt.  See the License for
>>>> the
>>>>        specific language governing permissions and limitations
>>>> under the
>>>>        License.
>>>>
>>>>        When distributing the software, include this License Header
>>>>        Notice in each file and include the License file at
>>>>        glassfish/bootstrap/legal/LICENSE.txt.  Sun designates this
>>>>        particular file as subject to the "Classpath" exception as
>>>>        provided by Sun in the GPL Version 2 section of the License
>>>> file
>>>>        that accompanied this code.  If applicable, add the  
>>>> following
>>>>        below the License Header, with the fields enclosed by
>>>> brackets []
>>>>        replaced by your own identifying information:
>>>>        "Portions Copyrighted [year] [name of copyright owner]"
>>>>
>>>>        Contributor(s):
>>>>
>>>>        If you wish your version of this file to be governed by
>>>> only the
>>>>        CDDL or only the GPL Version 2, indicate your decision by
>>>> adding
>>>>        "[Contributor] elects to include this software in this
>>>>        distribution under the [CDDL or GPL Version 2] license."
>>>> If you
>>>>        don't indicate a single choice of license, a recipient  
>>>> has the
>>>>        option to distribute your version of this file under either
>>>> the
>>>>        CDDL, the GPL Version 2 or to extend the choice of license
>>>> to its
>>>>        licensees as provided above.  However, if you add GPL
>>>> Version 2
>>>>        code and therefore, elected the GPL Version 2 license, then
>>>> the
>>>>        option applies only if the new code is made subject to such
>>>>        option by the copyright holder.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> </xsd:documentation>
>>>>
>>>> --kevan
>>>
>>>
>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- 
>>> -
>>> DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and  
>>> educational
>>> only.  Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
>>> constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
>>> and policies of the ASF.  See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
>>> official ASF policies and documents.
>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- 
>>> -
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>>>
>>
>> Craig Russell
>> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/ 
>> jdo
>> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
>> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
> only.  Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
> constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
> and policies of the ASF.  See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
> official ASF policies and documents.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>

Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!


Mime
View raw message