www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Lawrence Rosen (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (LEGAL-168) Apache Third-Party IP Policies
Date Mon, 17 Jun 2013 19:25:20 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-168?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13685879#comment-13685879

Lawrence Rosen commented on LEGAL-168:

Brief news announcement: Apache apparently has approved the WTFPL license for one of its projects.
See JIRA LEGAL-135. I was amused by this statement in that thread describing how how licenses
are diagnosed here at Apache: "Weak and horrible as the [WTFPL] license text is, it seems
fair to consider it a public domain license." 

And yet CC-BY, a license written by professionals with worldwide input to ensure the free
dissemination of copyrighted works, has yet to be approved by Apache.

This is just another cause of my confusion about Apache criteria for "Approved Third-Party

As Sam Ruby wrote in LEGAL-135, that WTFPL decision may "motivate us to figure out where the
license fits in our categories or if the categories need to be adjusted." I would prefer to
say that the *criteria for approval* be adjusted, specifically Item 3 (see my previous posting
here), rather than the *categories* that distinguish between source and binary distributions
of Apache software. After all, if the U.S. Library of Congress doesn't distinguish for copyright
registration purposes between source and binary forms of a work, why should we? But we *should*
care about which licenses are acceptable whatever the form (source or binary) of our Apache
Foo published work.

> Apache Third-Party IP Policies
> ------------------------------
>                 Key: LEGAL-168
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-168
>             Project: Legal Discuss
>          Issue Type: Question
>            Reporter: Lawrence Rosen
> I'd like to help the Apache community to discuss Apache Software Foundation policies
regarding contributions of copyrighted works from third parties in order for us to publish
them at the Apache website. 
> This discussion is now scattered among many JIRA issues and email archives. For example,
a recent thread here reconstructed my own correspondence about this to the legal-discuss@
list in 2005 -- and then misinterpreted what I'd said then. So I want this new JIRA issue
where I am free to say what I want when I want to say it, without obstruction from issue-jumpers
and list-jumpers around here who try to discourage coherent arguments.
> I'll probably be wrong in some of what I say. I will sign my own comments here and I
will read (and perhaps respond to) any comments from anyone who signs his or her name here
also. I will particularly welcome comments from the attorneys on this list, at least those
who aren't too cowardly or too busy to speak up. If you don't enjoy legal controversy, don't
read this JIRA thread.
> Best regards,
> /Larry
> P.S. More to come....

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

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

View raw message