www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Lawrence Rosen" <lro...@rosenlaw.com>
Subject RE: New versions of CC licenses
Date Sat, 07 Dec 2013 16:05:36 GMT
Sam Ruby wrote:

> I'm having trouble reconciling this with what the LibreOffice 

> community does (with our blessing!).  Note that there are no

> mentions at all of Apache on either of the following pages:



Why would we have blessed that? Our license explicitly requires of everyone: "You must give
any other recipients of the Work or Derivative Works a copy of this License; and...." This
is not so onerous that LibreOffice can ignore it.

 

Apache gives licenses, not blessings.

 

/Larry

 

 

From: Sam Ruby [mailto:rubys@intertwingly.net] 
Sent: Friday, December 06, 2013 5:35 PM
To: Legal Discuss
Subject: Re: New versions of CC licenses

 

On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Richard Fontana <rfontana@redhat.com> wrote:

On Fri, Dec 06, 2013 at 04:10:23PM -0500, Jeffrey Thompson wrote:
> In my hypo from a few notes ago, A distributes software to B under AL2.0.  B
> combines it with GPL code and distributes the result to C under the GPL.  As
> far as C is concerned, the GPL is the only license it needs to read in order to
> understand what rights it gets from B, even for A's code.  AL2.0 is in the
> notices file and C can review that if it wants to, but if there ever is a
> dispute between B and C, the license of record, the terms that get submitted to
> the court for interpretation, is the GPL, right?

Maybe, maybe not, depending on what the dispute is about. "The only
license it needs to read" is not correct. C needs to read the Apache
License 2.0 to understand fully the rights it is getting and the
requirements or obligations it has to upstream licensors.

The Apache License does not *vanish*.

 

I'm having trouble reconciling this with what the LibreOffice community does (with our blessing!).
 Note that there are no mentions at all of Apache on either of the following pages:

http://www.libreoffice.org/download/license/
http://www.libreoffice.org/about-us/faq/licensing-faq/

That project certainly gives the strong impression that LGPL2 (and MPL) are "the only license
it needs to read"... for licensees of that project.

 

- Sam Ruby

 


Mime
View raw message