Mailing-List: contact legal-discuss-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: legal-discuss@apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of ross.gardler@googlemail.com
 designates 209.85.219.205 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=googlemail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date
         :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type
         :content-transfer-encoding;
        b=U473GNJ6RgwIp6vdl2GQHKHMVSWtv7zQpRshER6FlWwzNhzGJ85rU1PV0MlGpCwadu
         zS42E8zCYTiyd/o5WfUMgks7VTw9jhY7203dWv0jUfNW9A/6pfZQ4KoV8SFFsBMCDaMe
         6/bJ/J83MPsiTPi282GcjOT5Axmy2X7MvF4O4=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: ross.gardler@googlemail.com
In-Reply-To: <5c902b9e0906300735v2f2bfeeem297b1f971e4e1699@mail.gmail.com>
References: <786269.43797.qm@web58005.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
	 <61c9bc470906300206l79a54a39kbf54555c67ce671c@mail.gmail.com>
	 <AF207370-81C2-4F95-9332-AEE506797345@pobox.com>
	 <61c9bc470906300310v295b4d31q171e9dca1ad090e7@mail.gmail.com>
	 <5c902b9e0906300735v2f2bfeeem297b1f971e4e1699@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 15:45:19 +0100
Message-ID: <61c9bc470906300745t285f15d0p75f19e59949b11e8@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: apache license 2.0: having trouble getting our university
	licensing office to like it, your thoughts?
From: Ross Gardler <rgardler@apache.org>
To: legal-discuss@apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

2009/6/30 Justin Erenkrantz <justin@erenkrantz.com>:
> On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 3:10 AM, Ross Gardler<rgardler@apache.org> wrote:
>> 2) US publicly funded work has specific constraints on the way outputs
>> are made available for public use, the UK does not have the same
>> restrictions.
>
> Two general comments:
>
> =A0- Depending upon the grant, certain funding agencies place different
> restrictions on what can be released and how it can be released.
>
> =A0- Academic work product is treated differently from staff work
> product. =A0So, for example, folks that Ross would talk primarily to as
> part of OSS Watch in UK would be covered under different rules than
> say a faculty member on the academic side of things.

Just in case it is important to anyone, we deal with research staff as
well as IT staff. In the UK universities are funded in such a way that
all software production is, effectively, publicly funded (it gets
complicated with commercial sponsored research, but that's an edge
case).

However, as I mentioned earlier the patent clause does not cause a
problem for us here in the UK. So it's probably not relevant.

Ross

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org