www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamil...@acm.org>
Subject RE: code without an iCLA ...
Date Fri, 26 Aug 2011 18:33:10 GMT
Section 5 is broader.  But yes, Section 5 says that a contribution under its terms does not
modify any existing agreement, and that would likely include an iCLA in the specific case
where the contribution is to an Apache project. [I am still waiting for the casting call to
play a lawyer on cable.]

-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Shahaf [mailto:d.s@daniel.shahaf.name] 
Sent: Friday, August 26, 2011 09:52
To: Sam Ruby
Cc: legal-discuss@apache.org; michael.meeks@novell.com
Subject: Re: code without an iCLA ...

Sam Ruby wrote on Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 12:32:32 -0400:
[ ... ]
> I also encourage you to read section 5 of the Apache License, Version
> 2.0 itself.  The license, the CLAs and the grants are intentionally
> overlapping in scope.  The intent is that we are covered multiple
> ways.

Doesn't Section 5 of ALv2 state that it doesn't override the ICLA?

[ ... ]


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


Mime
View raw message