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: Move log4cplus' license to ASL 2.0.
Date Tue, 11 Aug 2009 14:51:37 GMT
Ceki Gulcu wrote:
> 
> The ASF chose a conservative reading of the reverse-engineering
> requirement. Even if that reading is correct and we will probably
> never know, ASF bending backward to accommodate and protect
> closed-source applications, is not necessarily the only path the
> foundation could have chosen as there are other reasonable paths
> available.

That is not the purpose of the AL.  It ensures that developers who use
AL code have the greatest flexibility in using the work.  It facilitates
adoption; AL works can be adopted by anyone anywhere without additional
licensing concerns which inhibit adoption.

Since the ASF is a developer-centric organization it should make sense
that ASF licensing ensures developer's freedom, rather than users' or
code's freedom, no?





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


Mime
View raw message