Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-legal-discuss-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 8250 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2008 19:18:55 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 17 Dec 2008 19:18:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 99586 invoked by uid 500); 17 Dec 2008 19:19:06 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-legal-discuss-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 99418 invoked by uid 500); 17 Dec 2008 19:19:06 -0000 Mailing-List: contact legal-discuss-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: Reply-To: legal-discuss@apache.org List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list legal-discuss@apache.org Received: (qmail 99409 invoked by uid 99); 17 Dec 2008 19:19:06 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 17 Dec 2008 11:19:06 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of hyandell@gmail.com designates 209.85.198.235 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.198.235] (HELO rv-out-0506.google.com) (209.85.198.235) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 17 Dec 2008 19:18:51 +0000 Received: by rv-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id k40so44085rvb.29 for ; Wed, 17 Dec 2008 11:18:30 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=2Kbd33Ypsonq3T7LVKuRLte17noKeklPB5TmTmKHa5w=; b=YBLUCgCqlEU2MOl9iAurtzJLKukkfOxBTPOPD7z3JFShvUG1rl2aiQIogfEb4P6/ch byLV3/rjzhK0R0cJKVyGWSePF/c3c8RHadu/NkhM+ZSWQooY9Aua47ClfHWjenwdLSay PaE/RsTnTxBocRZeBThTuCVeArQYN2kDfEZC8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=nq7PiwhxeDC2BanAkOG8dzUUUCWM6Yl4DzWyN6xBgzZeoRkIuPAT5mRjRjxsJ247iW /PtUqeGqnUQdJx4OI5ao5YybpL3xJgVzu7+AkpxOa/hq3Xa/fn17I5uMElm3eHxuFMgn IVbZ2aY+js2fdeS8qC0Zb8CvjjVSsxtL+rcQs= Received: by 10.114.181.6 with SMTP id d6mr554049waf.94.1229541510622; Wed, 17 Dec 2008 11:18:30 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.114.159.2 with HTTP; Wed, 17 Dec 2008 11:18:30 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <2d12b2f00812171118u6acd6berbfacb9095578c715@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2008 11:18:30 -0800 From: "Henri Yandell" To: legal-discuss@apache.org Subject: Re: w3c license versus svn In-Reply-To: <3d4032300812170542y73ecd75ek805903d8fb2c24ba@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <61b5d9410811191833rff28ca5m799de205d0c6f927@mail.gmail.com> <2d12b2f00811251245u2a667ce4i62eb8dc7b0b8de01@mail.gmail.com> <3d4032300812170542y73ecd75ek805903d8fb2c24ba@mail.gmail.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 5:42 AM, Sam Ruby wrote: > On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 3:45 PM, Henri Yandell wrote: >> Looking at Bill's answer - I think the answer here is No. >> >> It's a read-only format and: >> >> a) Shouldn't be in the distribution - category X, > > Why does "read-only" make it category X? I thought the salient > difference between category X and category B was that the license > prevents us from developing our code under our license? Overly aggressive summarizing on my part. Category X because there is explicitly not a right to modify the content: "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." Agreed that our axis for Category B/X is about it preventing us from developing our code - so this needs more discussion. The language above is strong and makes me personally go "No way, too painful", yet I don't yet agree with Roy's statement that we only allow Open Source in SVN. This ticket was resolved as BSD - so we should spin this off as an abstract discussion (that we have a few of in JIRA and need to keep movement happening on). Hen --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org