www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ralph Goers <Ralph.Go...@dslextreme.com>
Subject Re: What licenses in category X satisfy criterion #2?
Date Wed, 05 Mar 2008 07:19:18 GMT
Hi Joe,
First, I am not a member of the legal committee so my answers are only 
my own opinion. I participate here because I actually enjoy the legal 
aspects of software - even though I completely disagree with software 
patents.

As http://people.apache.org/~rubys/3party.html states, the LGPL violates 
constraint #3, not #2.  Criteria #2 refers to licenses like the GPL 
which says in part

> The "Program", below,
> refers to any such program or work, and a "work based on the Program"
> means either the Program or any derivative work under copyright law:
> that is to say, a work containing the Program or a portion of it,
> either verbatim or with modifications and/or translated into another
> language.
So any program which uses a library licensed under the GPL must also be 
licensed under the GPL as they would be considered to be derivative 
works. Like it or not, any software that you write that uses software 
written by someone else isn't a completely independent work since you 
are building upon the work of others.

As for the ServiceMix case, there are at least two reasons their case 
needed to be brought before the legal committee.
1. No use of the LGPL had ever been permitted before. While in my 
opinion the ServiceMix case is allowed under 3party.html it still needs 
to be formally approved.
2. Part of the consideration is not only what the license is but how the 
third party component is used. There are cases where use of a GPL 
component may be allowed and there are cases where the LGPL will be 
disallowed. For example, in my opinion a project that requires and only 
works with Hibernate (LGPL) shouldn't be allowed.

Ralph


Joe Schaefer wrote:
> Criterion #2 states:
>
>   The license must not place restrictions on the 
>   distribution of independent works that simply use or
>
>   contain the covered work.
>
> It seems to me that the ServiceMix case under
> discussion exemplifies this situation, where they wish
> to use JBOSS as an optional work, and include some
> glue 
> code (presumably under the Apache License) in their
> product.
>
> If LGPL does not violate criterion #2, then the
> current policy allows them to do this without approval
> from the legal-affairs committee.  But if it does
> violate it, then according to the document both the
> PMC
> chair and the legal-affairs chair must approve.
>
> Would it be possible to produce a list of licenses
> which satisfy criterion #2, and add them to the
> policy?
>
> Personally I don't understand criterion #2, because to
> my thinking independent works shouldn't even care
> about
> 3rd party licenses.
>
>
>
>       ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
> http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
>
>   

---------------------------------------------------------------------
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


Mime
View raw message