www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Roy T. Fielding" <field...@gbiv.com>
Subject Re: Understanding non-release licensing at the ASF
Date Wed, 26 Aug 2015 02:25:17 GMT
> On Aug 25, 2015, at 1:15 PM, William A Rowe Jr <wrowe@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> 
> Ross and Jim have shed a number clues to correct my miss-understanding of the licensing
provenance of non-release artifacts here at the ASF, and I'd like to codify my understanding
in the fewest words possible.
> 
> 1. Apache Software Foundation Releases are licensed and distributed under the Apache
License 2.0, along with other compatible licenses as applicable to any non-Apache-licensed
components included in that release.

The source release, as a whole, is distributed under Apache License 2.0.  The fact that the
other licenses are
compatible with the Apache License allows us to do that. This does not change the fact that
the other
licenses are still in effect and applicable to those components, as well, particularly when
they are
extracted from the whole.

> 2. What is published to its websites (and external entities such as YouTube) are all
Copyright the Apache Software Foundation, and is generally(?) licensed under the Apache License
2.0.

No.  The collective work is copyright the ASF to the extent that its collection is original.
Otherwise,
various bits of original work are still copyright by the various contributors that originated
them.
We should have been granted a license from the copyright owner to distribute them under our
license.

> 3. The Apache Software Foundation Subversion and GIT repositories, patches attached to
the ASF bug trackers, and all other non-release artifacts such as snapshots and nightly builds
are neither Copyright nor Licensed by the ASF, but are Copyright and Licensed by the individual
committers and contributors who submit their proposed code, edits and patches to the ASF.

No and Yes.  Anything the PMC as a whole has been responsible for curating is at least potentially
a collective work of the ASF, which includes the contents of svn and git. This does not change
the
individual copyrights that might apply to whatever has been collected.

> In short, only the work product, what is formally "published" to the web sites, youtube,
and in release packages is subject to an ASF grant of AL content.  Everything else, submitted
under the terms of ICLA/CCLA agreements, direct assignments and pursuant to section 5. of
the AL are all AL 2.0 copyright licenses granted by individual submittors.

No.  Nothing is ever that simple.

Regardless, we generally don't care who owns the copyright provided that all the copyright
owners
have permitted us to redistribute under our license.

....Roy


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


Mime
View raw message