www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Doug Cutting <cutt...@apache.org>
Subject Re: a note about indirect contributions
Date Tue, 22 Apr 2008 15:21:13 GMT
Sam Ruby wrote:
>> (to be perfectly clear, this is not the situation with Sourcesense and 
>> Microsoft)
> Agreed.  This particular scenario does not seem to directly apply to 
> Sourcesense and Microsoft.  Separately, Roy has posted on poi-dev
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/poi-dev/200804.mbox/%3c5D4680C0-1DF8-436B-8BBC-44CF62EBFBF9@gbiv.com%3e

I don't see evidence in that message for the assertion that this does 
not apply.  Roy states there that, "if SourceSense is indeed being 
contracted by Microsoft for the purpose of contributing to POI, then 
Microsoft is a Contributor and bound by the terms of our license".

So the bit of information I am missing is precisely what Microsoft has 
contracted with Sourcesense.  The press seems to imply the contract 
includes POI, doesn't it?


What am I missing?


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