Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-legal-discuss-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-legal-discuss-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id BE4AB10427 for ; Mon, 15 Jul 2013 16:12:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 47603 invoked by uid 500); 15 Jul 2013 16:12:26 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-legal-discuss-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 47418 invoked by uid 500); 15 Jul 2013 16:12:26 -0000 Mailing-List: contact legal-discuss-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: Reply-To: legal-discuss@apache.org List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list legal-discuss@apache.org Received: (qmail 47411 invoked by uid 99); 15 Jul 2013 16:12:26 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 15 Jul 2013 16:12:26 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: error (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [64.85.173.253] (HELO server.dankulp.com) (64.85.173.253) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 15 Jul 2013 16:12:20 +0000 Received: by server.dankulp.com (Postfix, from userid 5000) id E723E185650; Mon, 15 Jul 2013 12:11:38 -0400 (EDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on server.dankulp.com X-Spam-Level: X-Msg-File: /tmp/mailfilter-legal-discuss@apache.org.CYUXJYzCwG Received: from macbook.house.dankulp.com (c-24-91-72-253.hsd1.ma.comcast.net [24.91.72.253]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by server.dankulp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A853818564E; Mon, 15 Jul 2013 12:11:35 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.5 \(1508\)) Subject: Re: [jira] [Commented] (LEGAL-172) Require a copyright notice in source headers From: Daniel Kulp In-Reply-To: <04e501ce8173$af4eeb10$0decc130$@rosenlaw.com> Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2013 12:11:34 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <6213E561-EBC6-4D45-9D4B-13B712F0D35B@gmail.com> <03ff01ce80ae$d787a920$8696fb60$@rosenlaw.com> <009a01ce80b5$dd05bde0$971139a0$@acm.org> <040d01ce80c5$98209d70$c861d850$@rosenlaw.com> <04bd01ce8168$1bf472f0$53dd58d0$@rosenlaw.com> <04e501ce8173$af4eeb10$0decc130$@rosenlaw.com> To: legal-discuss@apache.org, X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1508) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Old-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=3.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00, URIBL_BLOCKED shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 On Jul 15, 2013, at 11:55 AM, Lawrence Rosen = wrote: > Sam Ruby asked: >> What leads you to believe that our policy require projects to remove = copyright notices? >=20 > See http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice.=20 >=20 > This policy states that: "The NOTICE file may also include copyright = notices moved from source files submitted to the ASF." Perhaps I should = have said "moved" rather than "removed", although I would ask projects = themselves to tell us what they do with the notices and headers they = find in contributions? Are our projects consistent in "retaining" (as = distinguished from "removing or moving and destroying the context of") = the notices they find in contributions? >=20 > It has been my impression that some projects go to great length to = scrub contributions so that all previous copyright notices are removed. = If they do this with *other Apache License 2.0 contributions* then they = are not honoring section 4(c) of our own license! If I am wrong about = this, I humbly apologize. In general, we ask the original contributors to move the Copyright = notice from each file into the NOTICE. Generally, if you ask nicely = and explain the reasoning, they are more than happy to oblige.=20 Dan >=20 > /Larry >=20 >=20 >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Sam Ruby [mailto:rubys@intertwingly.net]=20 > Sent: Monday, July 15, 2013 8:19 AM > To: legal-discuss@apache.org; lrosen@rosenlaw.com > Subject: Re: [jira] [Commented] (LEGAL-172) Require a copyright notice = in source headers >=20 > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 10:32 AM, Lawrence Rosen = wrote: >> Sam Ruby wrote on 7/14: >>> If Dennis wishes to redistribute the results, we would ask that he=20= >>> comply with section 4c of our license. >>=20 >> Here is section 4(c) of our Apache License 2.0: >>=20 >> "You must retain, in the Source form of any Derivative Works that = You distribute, >> all copyright, patent, trademark, and attribution notices from = the Source form of the >> Work, excluding those notices that do not pertain to any part of = the Derivative Works;" >>=20 >> Perhaps Sam or someone else familiar with Apache history can explain = why our license demands of our licensees that they retain our notices, = but our policy requires projects to remove the copyright notices of our = contributors. >=20 > What leads you to believe that our policy require projects to remove = copyright notices? >=20 > - Sam Ruby >=20 > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org >=20 >=20 >=20 > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org >=20 --=20 Daniel Kulp dkulp@apache.org - http://dankulp.com/blog Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org