www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Sam Ruby" <ru...@intertwingly.net>
Subject Re: Licenses are not always what they seem [was: RE: GPL licensing question ...]
Date Sun, 27 Jul 2008 15:38:29 GMT
On Sat, Jul 26, 2008 at 11:38 PM, Joe Schaefer <joe_schaefer@yahoo.com> wrote:
> --- On Sat, 7/26/08, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote:
>
>> If we wish to do something with a body of code, and the
>> provided
>> license does not give us the permissions we need, we should
>> seek
>> another license.
>
> Which is exactly what explicit permission is, a license which
> trumps all other considerations.

If by explicit, you mean a signed agreement between the ASF and the
third party that covers the terms, then I agree.

If you mean verbal statement, a statement in email, a note on a web
page, or any or all of the above when made by one of the contributors
to the body of code, then I think that falls a bit short of what we
need.

- Sam Ruby

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