www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <...@jaguNET.com>
Subject Re: InfoWorld article on LibreOffice and OpenOffice
Date Tue, 11 Aug 2015 15:51:13 GMT

> On Aug 11, 2015, at 11:27 AM, Lawrence Rosen <lrosen@rosenlaw.com> wrote:
> 
> Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> There is a lot of FUD out there focused and directed towards AOO and the ASF regarding
licensing as it relates to LO.
> ...and...
>> What is strange, of course, is that they conveniently forget that LO's widespread
and rampant consumption of AOO code and patches is proof that what they are saying is total
BS.d
> 
> 
> I agree with Jim that there is a lot of FUD out there. We bring some of it on ourselves.
> 
> Of course what is strange, Jim, is that AOO refuses for FUD reasons to accept the widespread
(and rampant) consumption of MPL LO code into AOO, which FOSS rules allow!
> 
> Users of AOO lose.


End-users and other consumers of AOO would lose if we did adjust our
policy to allow ASF project codebases to require, bundle and
depend-on non-compliant code.

Again, this is not what is ALLOWED but rather what we, as an
organization, has set down as a policy.

Here is an analogy: When the stop-light turns from Red to Green,
I am legally allowed to step on the gas and go thru. If someone
runs the Red (on their side) and hits me, then legally I am
protected (it's not my fault), but it is still something I wish
to prevent. So my POLICY is, when the light turns Green, to wait a
second or 2, look both ways, and *then* step on the gas.

I will also state that the IT eco-system, at large, is benefited
when there are permissive versions of code in addition to copy-
left versions, and that our policy encourages the creation of
such ALv2 alternatives.

Cheers!

> 
> /Larry
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:jim@jaguNET.com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2015 5:51 AM
> To: legal-discuss@apache.org
> Cc: orcmid@apache.org
> Subject: Re: InfoWorld article on LibreOffice and OpenOffice
> 
> 
>> On Aug 6, 2015, at 11:29 PM, Marvin Humphrey <marvin@rectangular.com> wrote:
>> 
>> On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 7:11 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton <orcmid@apache.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> It is not at all clear how the “greater flexibility of open-source licenses”
>>> is pertinent to end-user requirements for use of an ODF-compliant 
>>> software product in a civil administration environment.
>> 
>> From the article:
>> 
>> During Munich's multiyear migration from proprietary software (read:
>> Microsoft), the city's administration decided to go with LibreOffice 
>> over  OpenOffice back in 2012. (One cited reason was "the greater 
>> flexibility of  the project regarding consumption of open source 
>> licenses.")
>> 
>> It's hilarious when copyleft licensing gets credit for the flexibility 
>> of permissive licensing.
>> 
> 
> There is a lot of FUD out there focused and directed towards AOO and the ASF regarding
licensing as it relates to LO. Mostly this is to influence people (and corps) that contributing
to LO is good and safe and more in keeping w/ the ideals of open source than it would be in
contributing to AOO. A lot of this FUD comes from people who should Know Better and who have
had it against the ASF since we accepted AOO under our wing and claim that that action has
somehow shown us to be more religiously strict than the FSF!
> 
> What is strange, of course, is that they conveniently forget that LO's widespread and
rampant consumption of AOO code and patches is proof that what they are saying is total BS.
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> 


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


Mime
View raw message