www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Evan Ward <evan.w...@nrl.navy.mil>
Subject Re: ICLA US Government
Date Thu, 27 Mar 2014 13:46:44 GMT
Doug, Chris,

As Luc, said I can post the contributions to github (or JIRA) and make
clear that the project as a whole is under the Apache License, and my
patches are in the public domain. Then based on the Apache's legal FAQ
and Larry's earlier comments Apache is both able and glad to accept the
contributions. It would be more of a Linux-style development process,
but would meet Apache's legal requirements.

Ted,

You're right, I forgot to mention section section 7 to the lawyers here.
I'll do that now. Though all the boilerplate associated with section 7
doesn't seem to "tear through those weeds and empower those contributing."

All,

As I mentioned before, If someone from Apache wants to talk directly to
the people here with the power to make a decision, I can provide contact
information. Then we can stop playing this game of telephone and perhaps
make some progress.

Best Regards,
Evan

On Fri 21 Mar 2014 05:50:38 PM EDT, Ted Dunning wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 12:48 PM, Luc Maisonobe <luc@spaceroots.org
> <mailto:luc@spaceroots.org>> wrote:
>
> Can't we just "reword" (not change the spirit, just change the words)
> our ICLA/CCLA to make explicit the fact we do not ask people to
> own the
> work they contribute but simply can contribute. And no, I do not agree
> with the fact it is already what is written in the CLA. I agree it is
> the spirit of the CLA, but this spirit is worded in such a way some
> picky people (like myself, Evan or the lawyers at NRL) find it
> does not
> cover properly the case of public domain.
>
>
> The license already covers this situation. It just doesn't cover it
> in the first clause.
>
> See clause 4:
>
> 4. You represent that you are legally entitled to grant the above
> license. If your employer(s) has rights to intellectual property
> that you create that includes your Contributions, you represent
> that you have received permission to make Contributions on behalf
> of that employer, that your employer has waived such rights for
> your Contributions to the Foundation, or that your employer has
> executed a separate Corporate CLA with the Foundation.
> and clause 7:
>
> 7. Should You wish to submit work that is not Your original creation,
> You may submit it to the Foundation separately from any
> Contribution, identifying the complete details of its source and of
> any license or other restriction (including, but not limited to,
> related patents, trademarks, and license agreements) of which you
> are personally aware, and conspicuously marking the work as
> "Submitted on behalf of a third-party: [named here]".
> How doe these not cover Evan's situation? Especially clause 7?
>
>
>
> > However I
> > think everyone here but you agrees that you can in fact both
> sign the
> > ICLA and contribute if your employer desires you to contribute your
> > work to Apache.
>
> Sorry, I'm on Evan's side here, he is not alone.
>
>
> You are clearly correct. He is not alone.
>
> I still contend that he is over-worrying this issue.
>


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


Mime
View raw message