www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org>
Subject Re: Understanding non-release licensing at the ASF
Date Tue, 25 Aug 2015 21:08:40 GMT
On Tue, 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.
>
> 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.
>
> 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.
>
> 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.

I've asked this question on the thread where the discussion originated, but I'd
like to repeat it here to add to the list of points that I would like
to see explicitly
validated:

4. Because of language in ICLA, the "Grant of Copyright License" is specifically
targeting "the Foundation and [to] recipients of software distributed
by the Foundation"
and as such does NOT guarantee that contributions NOT included into a formal
ASF release (since only releases can be considered distributed) are
licensed under
the ALv2.

IOW, if an entity outside of ASF takes non-released contributions said entity
needs to obtain a separate license Grant of Copyright License from original
contributors OR wait for ASF to produce a release.

Thanks,
Roman.

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


Mime
View raw message