Mailing-List: contact legal-discuss-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: legal-discuss@apache.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20130117181652.GA3320@lp-shahaf.local>
References: <20130117174927.GA4626@srcf.ucam.org>
	<CAP-ksog2yyHmybMpSLAthgpk9Y-jRHuQQ2mRnAFSwf5nTrUTUQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<20130117181652.GA3320@lp-shahaf.local>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 13:28:25 -0500
Message-ID: 
 <CAP-ksoiW8DbxWcQgqb6BC5SB802YrJ58MEpT+UAoCTmX8OtB0Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Clarification of "distribution" under the SGA
From: Rob Weir <robweir@apache.org>
To: Daniel Shahaf <d.s@daniel.shahaf.name>
Cc: legal-discuss@apache.org, Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 1:16 PM, Daniel Shahaf <d.s@daniel.shahaf.name> wrote:
> Is there a concrete instance of this question you guys are interested in?
>

The question is in the context of IBM's SGA for Symphony, where the
code is now in the SVN of the OpenOffice project.

But, if you mean has anyone with a genuine interest in using the code
come forward and asked, then no, this has been hypothetical as far as
I can tell.  Matt can speak for himself.

-Rob

> Rob Weir wrote on Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 13:13:10 -0500:
>> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 12:49 PM, Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org> wrote:
>> > The SGA contains the following:
>> >
>> > "Grant of Copyright License. Subject to the terms and conditions
>> > of this Agreement, You hereby grant to the Foundation and to
>> > recipients of software distributed by the Foundation a perpetual,
>> > worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable
>> > copyright license to reproduce, prepare derivative works of,
>> > publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, and distribute
>> > Your Contributions and such derivative works."
>> >
>> > and similar language for patents. Is a checkout of code from an Apache
>> > svn repository considered "software distributed by the Foundation", even
>> > if said code is in an unreleased branch?
>> >
>>
>> By way of background, this is recurring question that has come up with
>> OpenOffice.  What is the status of code that has been contributed to
>> the ASF by SGA, but but yet been taken through an Podling release, or
>> IP Clearance and a normal release.  In that intermediate stage, what
>> do we say about the ability of others to use the code?
>>
>> IMHO, we can say little or nothing.  How could we if it has not get
>> gone through a release?  The release via our due diligence and vote is
>> the mechanism that we (the ASF, via a PMC) use to make a firm
>> statement about code.
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>>
>> > Thanks,
>> > --
>> > Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org
>> >
>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>> >
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>>

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