Mailing-List: contact legal-discuss-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: legal-discuss@apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: local policy includes SPF record at
 spf.trusted-forwarder.org)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\))
Subject: Re: [jira] [Commented] (LEGAL-185) Classify 3-clause BSD ("simplified
 BSD")
From: Jim Jagielski <jim@jaguNET.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAM1oqKrvKZDS8SzBWqdNSMby3S3cEr134q4JZkD6yUY+GOkKuQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2013 06:25:07 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <5FEC3983-07A0-4238-820E-FED89FB00108@jaguNET.com>
References: <JIRA.12682278.1386030531295@arcas>
 <JIRA.12682278.1386030531295.64016.1386096756806@arcas>
 <529E41A1.2000900@apache.org>
 <CAP-ksoi0pbBeaPuspb6V8ozmyeg_jnrU098uuEhi5QoY8=GCaQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM1oqKrvKZDS8SzBWqdNSMby3S3cEr134q4JZkD6yUY+GOkKuQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "legal-discuss@apache.org Discuss" <legal-discuss@apache.org>

FWIW, even the old 4-clause is Cat-A as well.

On Dec 3, 2013, at 7:03 PM, Kevan Miller <kevan.miller@gmail.com> wrote:

>=20
> On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 3:10 PM, Rob Weir <robweir@apache.org> wrote:
> Thanks, but I don't see that information as relevant to the question
> I'm asking.  I'm not asking about the library, or even asking what the
> license is.  I'm asking Apache Legal Affairs what the classification
> of that license is.
>=20
> I agree with that. I believe the intent was for 2-clause and 3-clause =
BSD to be category-a. Would be nice if somebody could search the mailing =
list archives for proof of this. Barring this, I'd give a little time =
for dissenting opinions to be registered...
>=20
> --kevan=20
>=20
>=20
> --=20
> --kevan


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