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: w3c license versus svn
Date Mon, 17 Nov 2008 18:09:16 GMT
Here are the two major issues I see...

Benson Margulies wrote:
> May I check in tests distributed with the following notice into subversion?
> 
> The entire contents of this directory and all its sub-directories are
>           ***Copyright (C) World Wide Web Consortium 2006, 2007***
> 
> They are made available under the terms of the
>  W3C DOCUMENT NOTICE AND LICENSE,
> available online at
> http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/copyright-documents-19990405.html

You'll never be able to check in any other content into that directory or
it's subdirectories, they would have to be the literal files from the W3C
or that copyright statement would be invalid.  But you have no permission
to modify that copyright statement to make it valid, so ASF files cannot
coexist in that directory.  Digging into the license language...

  Permission to use, copy, and distribute the contents of this document, or
  the W3C document from which this statement is linked, in any medium for
  any purpose and without fee or royalty is hereby granted, provided that
  you include the following on ALL copies of the document, or portions
  thereof, that you use:

    1. A link or URL to the original W3C document.
    2. The pre-existing copyright notice of the original author, or if it
       doesn't exist, a notice of the form: "Copyright © [$date-of-document]
       World Wide Web Consortium, (Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
       Institut National de Recherche en Informatique et en Automatique,
       Keio University). All Rights Reserved.
       http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/" (Hypertext is preferred, but a
       textual representation is permitted.)

Not unreasonble... with one caviat further below.

    3. If it exists, the STATUS of the W3C document.

Does this mean the STATUS for the snapshot?  If so, this doesn't look like
a hardship.  If it means this must be frequently refreshed, that seems like
an unreasonable demand.  [Future-present requirements on the licensor].

  No right to create modifications or derivatives of W3C documents is
  granted pursuant to this license. However, if additional requirements
  (documented in the Copyright FAQ) are satisfied, the right to create
  modifications or derivatives is sometimes granted by the W3C to
  individuals complying with those requirements.

This absolutely violates the spirit of the AL.  Not sure of our position,
but it stinks of falling into Category X licensing, especially since that
restriction is not prominently carried on the source files.

And you don't even have the right to modify the files in order to make this
additional restriction perfectly clear.

Thoughts?

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