www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamil...@acm.org>
Subject RE: LICENSE and NOTICE for EXE and DMG files
Date Fri, 12 Jun 2015 17:37:00 GMT
I am confused about the ambiguous use of "BSD" below.  

If I understand the discussion at other places on this list, binaries are subject to the copyright
and the notices applicable to components that pertain to the source codes from which they
are derived, whether or not those source codes are part of the ASF Project release.

This means to me that if you embed code in the binary that is not part of the ASF Project
source release, then the license applicable to that binary component need to be honored, and
this might have to be reflected in LICENSE and NOTICE files that are part of the distributed
binary.  In addition, many licenses specify how notices are to be made with respect to binaries
as a kind of attribution condition.  Terms of those licenses often specify a notice requirement.

So, to Alex's original question, yes, there must be a LICENSE and NOTICE and perhaps other
files that are part of the configured executable installation that account for what is installed,
not just what the ASF Project source release contains.

The specifics of this will depend on the nature of the binary distribution and the additional
bits that are not part of the ASF project source.

I think the key has to do with where you are standing in the matter of serving the public
interest and honoring the contributors of the works your project depends upon.  It is good
to be exemplary of how this is done well.

Additional comment in-line.

-----Inline Comments Below To-----
From: Alex Harui [mailto:aharui@adobe.com] 
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 23:43
To: legal-discuss@apache.org
Subject: Re: LICENSE and NOTICE for EXE and DMG files

[ ... ]

Now one of the downloaded libraries we link to is BSD and BSD doesn’t seem
to be so clear on how they define derivative works.  How have other
projects handled this?  Must you have a popup in your GUI that displays
LICENSE and NOTICE?  Can you co-locate LICENSE and NOTICE in the same
folder as the EXE on dist.a.o?  Can you point folks to a web page with the
LICENSE and NOTICE text in it?

<orcmid>
   I don't understand what it means to say that "one of the downloaded libraries we link to
is BSD."  
   Do you mean that a BSD-licensed library (a .lib or .dll or other kind of shared or embedded
library) is incorporated in the build of the binary distribution?
   Or do you download the source and compile it into the binary even though it is not part
of the ASF Project released source code?
   I think you need to account for it either way, such that the terms of the BSD license are
honored.  There are various ways that honor the requirement that "Redistributions in binary
form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following
disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution."  Ideally,
the corresponding terms of other license (including ALv2) can be honored together by common
means.
   I suggest investigation of how other projects and software products accomplish this.  
 
   If your product operates in a GUI, there will be a variety of ways to provide the necessary
information.  It will be different with a console/terminal/command-line program.  In all cases,
you'll (also) want LICENSE, NOTICE and possibly other files at the location where the installed
binaries are configured for operation on the target platform.
</orcmid>


Thanks,
-Alex



---------------------------------------------------------------------
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


Mime
View raw message