Mailing-List: contact legal-discuss-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: legal-discuss@apache.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <199701d096fe$c69d1fb0$53d75f10$@rosenlaw.com>
References: <18c601d09678$9df86cd0$d9e94670$@rosenlaw.com>
	<CAFG6u8H_nJi4UDrJt4nsWV=uWiduZh4zA3UYZZfp2r4V7m+r2w@mail.gmail.com>
	<199701d096fe$c69d1fb0$53d75f10$@rosenlaw.com>
Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 07:29:44 -0500
Message-ID: 
 <CABD8fLU9j-6Y5h_PDZpBySg6-tBTJ2kZrvFjym2amLhAmqOdtg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Proposal: Apache Third Party License Policy
From: Greg Stein <gstein@gmail.com>
To: legal-discuss@apache.org, Lawrence Rosen <lrosen@rosenlaw.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bf10b1a069b9f0516fb4867

--047d7bf10b1a069b9f0516fb4867
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 10:23 AM, Lawrence Rosen <lrosen@rosenlaw.com>
wrote:

> Sam Ruby wrote:
> > You may not have been aware that it is an ASF problem to worry about
> whether downstream distributors can make derivative works -- Free and
> proprietary alike -- of our projects, but it is true.  As such, we care
> very much about the kind of dependencies a project takes on, and the
> license of code that we bundle.
>
> Sam, of course I'm aware of that. That is precisely why I am requesting
> that you change that antiquated policy.
>
> Please remember, EVERYONE can make derivative works (free and proprietary
> alike) of Apache projects even if that software includes EPL and MPL work=
s.
> What they can't do is to refuse to distribute derivative works of EPL and
> MPL components under their original licenses. That is a reciprocal
> requirement. But it doesn't prevent derivative works.
>

I don't understand what you're asking to change.

We've been distributing products that include MPL code for years. What's
the problem you're trying to solve?


>
> > EPL and MPL fall someplace in between.
>
> In between what and what?
>
> I've been challenged repeated here because certain GPL folks don't want
> their license interpreted this way. So if Apache changes its obsolete
> policy for every FOSS license except the GPL, I'll consider that a
> significant accomplishment. I'll wait impatiently for the lawyers who are
> trying to create a licensing exception for those GPL licensors that DO wa=
nt
> their works incorporated into Apache projects.
>

We're not going to allow GPL, for policy reasons. What are you asking for
the other licenses? It's been lost in the multitude of threads.

>=E2=80=A6

-g

--047d7bf10b1a069b9f0516fb4867
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 10:23 AM, Lawrence Rosen <span dir=
=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:lrosen@rosenlaw.com" target=3D"_blank">lrose=
n@rosenlaw.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div cla=
ss=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 =
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class=3D"">Sam Ruby=
 wrote:<br>
&gt; You may not have been aware that it is an ASF problem to worry about w=
hether downstream distributors can make derivative works -- Free and propri=
etary alike -- of our projects, but it is true.=C2=A0 As such, we care very=
 much about the kind of dependencies a project takes on, and the license of=
 code that we bundle.<br>
<br>
</span>Sam, of course I&#39;m aware of that. That is precisely why I am req=
uesting that you change that antiquated policy.<br>
<br>
Please remember, EVERYONE can make derivative works (free and proprietary a=
like) of Apache projects even if that software includes EPL and MPL works. =
What they can&#39;t do is to refuse to distribute derivative works of EPL a=
nd MPL components under their original licenses. That is a reciprocal requi=
rement. But it doesn&#39;t prevent derivative works.<br></blockquote><div><=
br></div><div>I don&#39;t understand what you&#39;re asking to change.</div=
><div><br></div><div>We&#39;ve been distributing products that include MPL =
code for years. What&#39;s the problem you&#39;re trying to solve?</div><di=
v>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;=
border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<span class=3D""><br>
&gt; EPL and MPL fall someplace in between.<br>
<br>
</span>In between what and what?<br>
<br>
I&#39;ve been challenged repeated here because certain GPL folks don&#39;t =
want their license interpreted this way. So if Apache changes its obsolete =
policy for every FOSS license except the GPL, I&#39;ll consider that a sign=
ificant accomplishment. I&#39;ll wait impatiently for the lawyers who are t=
rying to create a licensing exception for those GPL licensors that DO want =
their works incorporated into Apache projects.<br></blockquote><div><br></d=
iv><div>We&#39;re not going to allow GPL, for policy reasons. What are you =
asking for the other licenses? It&#39;s been lost in the multitude of threa=
ds.</div><div><br></div><div>&gt;=E2=80=A6</div><div><br></div><div>-g</div=
><div><br></div></div></div></div>

--047d7bf10b1a069b9f0516fb4867--