www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Lawrence Rosen" <lro...@rosenlaw.com>
Subject RE: on consensus, and serenity and Eclipse
Date Tue, 11 Aug 2015 21:35:56 GMT
David Jencks wrote:

> Can you detect that I am one of the members from which you have received
such an email explaining that i am happy with the current policy and
explaining how the current policy directly supports my employment?

 

Yes I can. And you received from me at the time an off-list response, also
copied to a senior copyright lawyer in IBM, asking for his clarification
about IBM's acceptance of MPLv2, ECL, and other FOSS and Creative Commons
licenses. IBM is a big and important company, and I certainly don't want
Apache to adopt any licensing policies that would make IBM unhappy or that
affected your employment.

 

Unfortunately that attorney is now on vacation....  And when he returns he
may not want to respond publicly. :-)

 

/Larry

 

Bcc: 

 

Lawrence Rosen

"If this were legal advice it would have been accompanied by a bill."

 

From: David Jencks [mailto:david_jencks@yahoo.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2015 2:19 PM
To: legal-discuss@apache.org; lrosen@rosenlaw.com
Subject: Re: on consensus, and serenity and Eclipse

 

Can you detect that I am one of the members from which you have received
such an email explaining that i am happy with the current policy and
explaining how the current policy directly supports my employment?

 

thanks

david jencks

 

On Aug 11, 2015, at 4:49 PM, Lawrence Rosen <lrosen@rosenlaw.com
<mailto:lrosen@rosenlaw.com> > wrote:

 

Mark Thomas wrote:

> What Larry can't seem to get his head around is that the membership is
happy with the current policy and - despite the points he raises - has no
wish to change it.

 

 

The only email I can find from you in my archives even remotely on this
topic was dated 5/20/2015 and it discussed the compliance of our Tomcat 7
release notes with the Eclipse License.  Perhaps I misfiled your comments.
Please forward me any other email from you "that the membership is happy
with the current policy and - despite the points he raises - has no wish to
change it."  I do acknowledge having received some such email, but not from
many members. Not many at all!

 

Speaking of the Eclipse License, do you want me to start another thread
about our willingness to aggregate Eclipse code with ALv2 code? I am
confident that a large number of companies
<http://www.eclipse.org/membership/showAllMembers.php>  will approve that. I
am confident that the Eclipse Foundation will not object. 

 

/Larry

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Thomas [mailto:markt@apache.org] 
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2015 1:12 PM
To: legal-discuss@apache.org <mailto:legal-discuss@apache.org> 
Subject: Re: on consensus, and serenity

 

On 11/08/2015 20:53, Tim Williams wrote:

> I'm curious how we can work ourselves out of this nagging cycle of 

> Larry encouraging us to be more liberal in our licenses because we 

> legally can and us responding with we don't want to even if we could 

> legally get away with it?

> 

> By my count, four out of the previous four months have seen this same 

> cycle in only slightly different forms.  I'm confident a quick mail 

> search would find at least as many months out of the previous four 

> years.  And, these tend to be long (>50) threads.

> 

> I support challenging the status quo, questioning policies, etc. In 

> fact, I believe it makes us stronger and a good rigorous debate on 

> core values helps newcomers to understand the Apache Way and our 

> culture in a deeper way.  It's healthy community behavior and 

> old-timers mostly don't mind helping folks understand the "why" behind 

> a given policy.

> 

> However, it's not healthy to keep asking the same question, over and 

> over, even while receiving the same answer each time.  It's neither 

> fun nor fruitful. Were it a technical issue, we could reason through 

> it and move on much more easily.

> 

> So, I wonder how we might re-assure Larry that his voice has been 

> heard but also allow us not to keep reading the same argument over and 

> over?

 

The lengthy replies to each of the multiple times Larry has raised this
point should be more than enough to convince him his voice has been heard.

 

What Larry can't seem to get his head around is that the membership is happy
with the current policy and - despite the points he raises - has no wish to
change it.

 

> I've thought perhaps a referendum membership vote (with steve) might 

> help? or maybe an explicit vote by the board [vs implicit by keeping 

> Jim around:)] or, ?

 

More than enough time has been wasted repeatedly responding to Larry only
for him to ignore responses he doesn't like. We don't need to waste more
time trying to appease Larry. If Larry wants to try and raise this at the
annual members meeting he is free to do so. I note he has asked again today
for folks employed by big companies to speak up with their views on his
proposal. Several of us already have (in favour of the current policy) and
he continues to ignore those posts.

 

At this point Larry's behaviour is best categorised as trolling and should
be treated as such. If the trolling behaviour continues then I'll treat it
the same way I'd treat it on any other ASF list: by unsubscribing the troll.

 

Mark

 

 

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

To unsubscribe, e-mail:  <mailto:legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org>
legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org

For additional commands, e-mail:  <mailto:legal-discuss-help@apache.org>
legal-discuss-help@apache.org

 


Mime
View raw message