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 Tue, 15 Jan 2008 19:42:38 GMT
Stefano Bagnara wrote:
> Henri Yandell ha scritto:
>> I think NOTICE/LICENSE should be there because it's a common and well
>> understood approach. Having to build a project to find out the
>> licensing terms of trunk is very lame.
> I think it is wrong if we let people think that the NOTICE in svn are 
> always right OR that building a random source tree will result in a 
> package containing *correct* LICENSE/NOTICE files.

If /repos/asf/fooproject/module/trunk/NOTICE is missing the copyright
notices of the contents of /repos/asf/fooproject/module/trunk/, your
project has an issue with violating IP.

But that isn't to say that this NOTICE file applies to some external
that the build process is going to grab.  In that case, it's up to your
project if you want an expansive NOTICE that refers to future bits of
the assembled software, or if you want a tightly focused NOTICE, but
assemble the larger NOTICE on the fly from the relevant copyright,
license and other useful nuggets gathered from that external.

The PRIOR rules said you place/retain copyright notices on each file.
The NEW policy says you can skip that, move them into a NOTICE.  The
policy *never* granted you the right to remove them altogether, or make
the providence of the code impossible to track down by placing it in
a meaningless location.

> Otherwise we'll have to make sure that every sandbox, every test branch, 
> every place in the svn tree at every single time contains valid and 
> correct NOTICE and LICENSE files. If this is the case I think the best 
> way to make sure we comply with this requirement is to add a 
> NOTICE/LICENSE to every folder containing the following disclaimer:
> ------
> This is not a distribution site, but a developers area.
> You don't have any right on the content of this folder.
> You *may* find official releases of this code here:
> <an address for the releases>
> -------

Which is utter bullshit, because every ASF originated source code file
is under the terms of the AL, whether it's released, or not.

Whether the ASF treats those files as fully vetted and approved is
altogether a different issue.  But they are licensed.

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