www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mohammad Noureldin <nour.moham...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Using content from StackOverflow
Date Fri, 16 May 2014 17:19:07 GMT
Hi Andrea

   Again thanks a lot for your feedback

On May 14, 2014 9:34 AM, "Andrea Pehiscetti" <pescetti@apache.org> wrote:
>
> On 12/05/2014 Mohammad Noureldin wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 8:59 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>>>
>>> Mohammad Noureldin wrote:
>>>>
>>>> "Qn: Can an Apache project use content from non ASF sources (forums,
>>>> mailing lists, etc...)?"
>>>
>>> Both "use" and "content" are quite vague. OpenOffice, for example, still
>>> hosts on the site and wiki old documentation that is not under ALv2. We
>>> don't include it in releases, of course
>>
>> Under which license that documentation is ? If you look at [0], you
>> will see at the footer "Copyright © 2011-2012 The Apache Software
>> Foundation Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0" ...
>> [0] http://openoffice.apache.org/
>
>
> That site is new. Everything there is under ALv2. I was referring to
legacy content on https://wiki.openoffice.org/ and some pre-Apache portions
of the users portal http://www.openoffice.org/ ; licenses include CC-BY 3,
see
https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/OOo3_User_Guides/OOo3.3_User_Guide_Chapters
>

In case of wiki.openoffice.org it is mentioned that the content is licensed
under the ALv2 unless otherwise

For the user guide website it points to (
http://www.openoffice.org/license.html) which is not as restrictive as the
SO one as stated in my earlier email
>
>> Maybe I widened the scope more than we want ? Maybe, but I want to
>> address it in a way that is not related to a certain source of content
>> or certain license, otherwise we will end adding a different Q&A for
>> each of these sources
>
>
> While not being a lawyer at all, I still believe that it is too broad to
adopt the same policy for the case of:
> - Content that is released (as part of the officially releases sources)
> - Content that is somewhere in SVN (like, test documents allowing free
redistribution but not licensed under ALv2)
> - Content that is provided as answers to mailing list messages (that may
link to, or quote, an external site)
>
> But I may be totally wrong too! I can't bring any further contributions
to this discussion other than the "real life" case I described.
>

True me neither, that's why I would like others to *please* add more
feedback if possible or just ask us to stop this discussion if it does not
make any sense and why

NOTE: it is mentioned that I'm case help needed to ask the Legal IPMC and
we are doing so but we still didn't get to any conclusion for this
discussion. Please help.

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

Mime
View raw message