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 C277110A3A for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 21:59:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 82999 invoked by uid 500); 6 Mar 2014 21:59:25 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-legal-discuss-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 82834 invoked by uid 500); 6 Mar 2014 21:59:23 -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 82556 invoked by uid 99); 6 Mar 2014 21:59:22 -0000 Received: from minotaur.apache.org (HELO minotaur.apache.org) (140.211.11.9) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 06 Mar 2014 21:59:22 +0000 Received: from localhost (HELO mail-qg0-f49.google.com) (127.0.0.1) (smtp-auth username robweir, mechanism plain) by minotaur.apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 06 Mar 2014 21:59:22 +0000 Received: by mail-qg0-f49.google.com with SMTP id z60so9011207qgd.8 for ; Thu, 06 Mar 2014 13:59:21 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=pEfmtmTYFMHquAp4oBR71zON/K/EfMnZNP5oynlN8BE=; b=kqs/8ea4NTcq/I8rrVD8iBagNE3ii7E8SyvTIeBZZWxaeVGIBbtUdmcz8Jzd9CiY6V gO/0a1yEPGN/SKCO/Zg1jASey7zxhIWQBH1JZmet1YT8EWHjHkQrnSo+qeSGswWre9Nc r2b89fDpWq2WI1gkZnRQJtUPzCcayzY/b6uZ4nn4aBvq0tiZoYHZFIzxy8EmhDqjteE2 BrEVhtzpdAZMQMgcXTVGwm2i44c0Z09n/m2tBVlz54TWFc4rK/zNHrvubLamc3qGhAmI hDYY7cQezvLneYL84qqHXAgwpRAfDtTcx0hQx0FP/e9DPzGMN/YfTgLabWnfjVjV7uxB QCOA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.224.21.129 with SMTP id j1mr17257405qab.13.1394143161404; Thu, 06 Mar 2014 13:59:21 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.96.25.102 with HTTP; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 13:59:21 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <531792EA.7080409@nrl.navy.mil> <388610E4-31F6-4F3D-A45B-C0CCE2E4C8DC@jaguNET.com> <40489573.15098609.1394138791060.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <5318E665.2050209@nrl.navy.mil> <676734696.15118170.1394141552754.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2014 16:59:21 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: ICLA US Government From: Rob Weir To: legal-discuss@apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (3980) wrote: > +1 that is very much my understanding as well. > If I'm not mistaken, the ICLA (as opposed to the CCLA) is tied to the individual and would cover contributions made by the committer even if they change jobs, or for that matter would cover personal (non-work related) contributions made while employed by the government. So it is still a good idea. -Rob > > Cheers, > Chris > > -----Original Message----- > From: Richard Fontana > Reply-To: "legal-discuss@apache.org" > Date: Thursday, March 6, 2014 1:32 PM > To: "legal-discuss@apache.org" > Cc: "private@commons.apache.org" > Subject: Re: ICLA US Government > >>I'd redraft that section 2. In any case I understand the longstanding ASF >>policy is 'use our standard CLAs, no special cases'. >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>> I got into programming for the tricky logic problems. Look like I should >>> have been a lawyer. :) >>> >>> For another open source project that uses the Apache License and ICLAs, >>> I joined using a modified ICLA (attached). If we s/CS/Apache/ and >>> s/Orekit/Commons/ would it be acceptable? I think it clears up the >>> worldwide issue and explicitly states "public domain with no license". >>> >>> Best Regards, >>> Evan >>> >>> On Thu 06 Mar 2014 03:46:31 PM EST, Richard Fontana wrote: >>> > >>> > But the point is that US government works for which copyright is >>> > excluded domestically may not have the same exclusion as to copies of >>> > those same works published in other countries. >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> > >>> > True, but public domain is a concept in all modern copyright systems. >>> > >>> > Moral right treatments differ, but I don't think that the Apache >>> > ICLA addresses that anyway. >>> > >>> > On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 5:55 AM, Jim Jagielski >> > > wrote: >>> > >>> > We also need to recall that US Copyright Law is not the >>> > sole one in existence ;) >>> > >>> > On Mar 6, 2014, at 2:36 AM, Ted Dunning >> > > wrote: >>> > >>> > > >>> > > You may not be the copyright owner, but you can grant a >>> > license to public domain works. >>> > > >>> > > As can I or anyone else. >>> > > >>> > > The fact that the the licensee doesn't need the license is >>> > irrelevant. >>> > > >>> > > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org >> >>--------------------------------------------------------------------- >>To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org >>For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org