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: icla for bulk import at the incubator
Date Thu, 02 Dec 2010 12:42:31 GMT
On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 6:57 AM, Benson Margulies <bimargulies@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear legal discuss,
> I'm mentor to the OpenNLP project. The major contributors to the
> existing code did their work on their own time, so no CCLAs are coming
> into play.
> This has raised a question. Is an ICLA good enough? To be specific, if
> a large, existing, lump of code was collaboratively built by about 5
> individuals, and they all submit ICLAs and show join the podling, are
> we good to import?
> Have posed the question, I'll now offer an opinion. No. The CCLA has
> an SGA schedule at the bottom for the specific purpose of granting
> rights to identified existing code. The ICLA does not. However, as
> usual, ALIMN. Am I starting at a shadow, or should the incubator
> policy be to require an SGA for any significant contributor of code to
> be imported (either attached to the bottom of a CCLA or set up
> independently)?

Short answer: if all of the copyright holders are individuals, then
ICLAs are sufficient.

Longer answer:

First, encourage the contributors to actually read the ICLA before
they sign it.  In particular, paragraph 4.

Second, the concurrent software grant at the bottom of the CCLA is optional.

More information:


> --benson

- Sam Ruby

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

View raw message