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 940CB116D7 for ; Tue, 24 Jun 2014 05:14:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 3191 invoked by uid 500); 24 Jun 2014 05:14:43 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-legal-discuss-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 3046 invoked by uid 500); 24 Jun 2014 05:14:43 -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 3035 invoked by uid 99); 24 Jun 2014 05:14:42 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 24 Jun 2014 05:14:42 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of kevan.miller@gmail.com designates 209.85.220.178 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.220.178] (HELO mail-vc0-f178.google.com) (209.85.220.178) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 24 Jun 2014 05:14:38 +0000 Received: by mail-vc0-f178.google.com with SMTP id ij19so7055511vcb.23 for ; Mon, 23 Jun 2014 22:14:17 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=mFGjXU5GZh+upUqhQsn2k4S3FVYHTmcFJqPkQ5vcoEQ=; b=kXlYXXxcTGTbodquadbM1uVWK2ryIhWx5AFIxBcKmOsc3to3f5VALY/AkGr4ITfQS2 I+uOOYUP2N5E7wtmYPJKFxZuRHffdY6NL3tDfznj+MJTbytkgvyzIkNww3npunDzFEWB Bf4cpOcDX6flifUR4Gjsizb1q2UGgc3QxlEM9x5dd/Pg9cX0Ja0U9rn8RH9pZtHx/zLm hxgUVE5Its0l5Rzb5Kx5YqWRMurMoos9HNRyIwnfAg/8WPePsmdzce4nIrf5BcQR0G3q Cu5oxuYIqyTL2R3lMF70rnpVaDLIWUm/8oLccI5KUisD5N7CM4pH8At2og1LcFpXbKDr SbHg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.220.250.203 with SMTP id mp11mr23185941vcb.2.1403586857580; Mon, 23 Jun 2014 22:14:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.58.237.72 with HTTP; Mon, 23 Jun 2014 22:14:17 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <39C7D2B9-7989-43CF-8785-1DCF15FE222E@classsoftware.com> References: <49D423B3-1FCE-49B5-80FE-217746D3B739@classsoftware.com> <39C7D2B9-7989-43CF-8785-1DCF15FE222E@classsoftware.com> Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 22:14:17 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Bundling an AL Font From: Kevan Miller To: "legal-discuss@apache.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e013d05020ebf9604fc8e080d X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --089e013d05020ebf9604fc8e080d Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 4:58 PM, Justin Mclean wrote: > > Not necessarily. An ASF project NOTICE can include additionall > attributions. > > For simplicity sake I was assuming that no NOTICE file exist the 3rd party > code. > In that case you don't need to do anything. If there was a NOTICE file, you must include all non-ASF attributions that apply to your usage (there's no need to copy the ASF attributions). Without a NOTICE file, in the distributed binary or original source(I try to check if .jar files don't include a NOTICE. Some projects aren't good about building jars with LICENSE/NOTICE files), you don't need to do anything. I downloaded the Open-Sans source, and don't see a NOTICE file there. You should verify this... > > > Once you have established the LICENSE (and NOTICE if any) that apply > > to the 3rd party code, the normal process applies. > > So where does the copyright attribution go? > In the absence of a NOTICE file? Nowhere, IMO. If the producers of Open-Sans wanted a copyright attribution, they would have (should have) created a NOTICE file. You can always verify with the producers to see if they made a mistake. > To put in context the current situation with the fonts is that we have > binary files (the font files) in a release that there no clear indication > what the license is or where they come from). You can assume that they are > Apache licensed (as no other license is indicated) but anyone reviewing the > release may want to know more information, like where they come from and > the original copyright owner may want attribution and/or it may be legally > required. To handle this, I would put something like the following in the LICENSE file: The is licensed under Apache License, Version 2.0. You can find similar examples from other LICENSE files. For example -- http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/trunk/LICENSE --kevan --089e013d05020ebf9604fc8e080d Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

= On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 4:58 PM, Justin Mclean <justin@classsoftwar= e.com> wrote:
> Not necessarily. An ASF project NOTICE can inclu= de additionall attributions.

For simplicity sake I was assuming that no NOTICE file exist the 3rd = party code.

In that case you don't = need to do anything.

If there was a NOTICE file, y= ou must include all non-ASF attributions that apply to your usage (there= 9;s no need to copy the ASF attributions).

Without a NOTICE file, in the distributed binary or ori= ginal source(I try to check if .jar files don't include a NOTICE. Some = projects aren't good about building jars with LICENSE/NOTICE files), yo= u don't need to do anything. I downloaded the Open-Sans source, and don= 't see a NOTICE file there. You should verify this...
=A0

> Once you have established the LICENSE (and NOTICE if any) that apply > to the 3rd party code, the normal process applies.

So where does the copyright attribution go?

=
In the absence of a NOTICE file? Nowhere, IMO. If the producers = of Open-Sans wanted a copyright attribution, they would have (should have) = created a NOTICE file. You can always verify with the producers to see if t= hey made a mistake.


To put in context the current situation with the fonts is that we have bina= ry files (the font files) in a release that there no clear indication what = the license is or where they come from). You can assume that they are Apach= e licensed (as no other license is indicated) but anyone reviewing the rele= ase may want to know more information, like where they come from and the or= iginal copyright owner may want attribution and/or it may be legally requir= ed.

To handle this, I would put some= thing like the following in the LICENSE file:

The <path-to-open-sans-font-file= -in-your-source-distribution> is licensed under Apache License, Version = 2.0.=A0

You can fin= d similar examples from other LICENSE files. For example --=A0http://svn.apache.= org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/trunk/LICENSE

--kevan

--089e013d05020ebf9604fc8e080d--