www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>
Subject Re: LICENSE and NOTICE files and SVN
Date Fri, 11 Jan 2008 20:50:50 GMT
simon wrote:
> Firstly, does this mean that it is ok for the NOTICE file published in a
> released module to be different (have more information) than the one
> checked in to svn?

When appropriate, of course.  If NOTICE is missing information relative
to the subversion repository it represents, than no.

For example, httpd has an import of expat along with a host of other
copyrights that apply to bits (dating way back to NCSA).  That one
is recorded in NOTICE.  But for example, the win32 builds include the
binaries of openssl.  In that case, the NOTICE installed with those
external binaries have additional NOTICE language with respect to
openssl project's copyright (and the copyrights that apply to openssl's
sources which they've incorporated).

> Secondly, in the case of Java we are releasing what is effectively a
> single ".so" file, and embedding the license/notice in it. You would
> expect the notice in this case to include NOTICE (ie copyright) info
> about projects that it *links* to (ie depends on, but does not itself
> contain)?

Odd to picture a distribution that wasn't otherwise packaged, but if it
really is a single binary artifact, there should be the appropriate
NOTICE and LICENSE in the same download location as the artifact, IMHO.

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

View raw message