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: fair use (was Re: What licenses in category X satisfy criterion #2?)
Date Wed, 05 Mar 2008 17:33:26 GMT
Joe Schaefer wrote:
> --- Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 11:39 AM, Joe Schaefer
>> <joe_schaefer@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>  So there are two issues as far as copyright goes
>>> then,
>>>  1) what is the licensing on the tarball we
>>>    distribute,
>>>  2) what is the licensing on the executable that
>>>    the user (ie second party) actually runs?
>> Yes for 1.
> Perhaps we should refine #1 to ask "What is the
> licensing on the actual product we distribute?".
> This would allow us to ignore questions about build
> dependencies and test suite dependencies and startup
> scripts, since the licensing on those chunks of
> software do not impact the licensing on the actual
> product.

+1 - well put.

>> On #2, it is important to realize that our licensees
>> may not actually
>> run the code themselves, but may sublicense our code
>> for distribution to fourth parties.
> True, but in the case of optional dependencies, those
> distributors should be able to remove whatever options
> they do not want to provide to their users, without 
> impacting the "default" operation of the product.


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