www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Richard Fontana <rfont...@redhat.com>
Subject Re: MPLv2 on AL2 header review ...
Date Wed, 30 May 2012 15:09:25 GMT
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 10:27:10AM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> I would also re-iterate Sam's post that the advice provided
> here does not constitute "real" legal advice; it is a
> list for the discussion of legal issues but should not be
> used, or perceived, as the ASF (or anyone one, or any entity)
> providing authoritative legal advice.

I understand of course it is not legal advice. But who would
someone/something like Michael/LibreOffice/TDF talk to learn how the
ASF authoritatively interprets the license it specifically is
granting?  I am asking out of more general interest, not specifically
about LibreOffice and AOO.

The issue is not simply one of getting advice on the other side on
what the Apache License 2.0 means in the abstract. With hundreds of
present-day ASF projects, we have what at least appears to be one
entity, one licensor, granting one common license; for better or worse
this is a rather unique situation where an organization ought to be
able to speak with one voice as to what its own license (the license
it actually drafted as well as which it grants) means for that large
set of projects.

> I am sure that the TDF itself is doing its own legal due-diligence
> and is getting de-facto legal counsel in its efforts. 
> I assume that
> the people on the CC list are those people... 

Just to clarify, I am not counsel, de facto or otherwise, to TDF. I
represent only one client at this time, Red Hat, Inc. :-)

> Or, at least, I
> hope so, but am thinking otherwise since they would not have
> allowed the embarrassing "copyright issue" to have even made
> it out of the gate.

It's moot now, but I don't think that issue is as clear-cut as this
discussion has supposed. A copyright/license notice on a source file
could refer to a larger work of which that source file is a
constituent part. I'm not saying I would recommend that practice, as
it could become misleading to some when the source file is viewed in
isolation, but it seems not uncommon in open source project
development. Nonetheless it is highly useful for everyone to get some
sense that the ASF disapproves of such a practice.
 
- RF


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


Mime
View raw message