www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Henri Yandell <bay...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Third Party FOSS licenses
Date Sat, 01 Aug 2015 17:04:56 GMT
On Sat, Aug 1, 2015 at 9:03 AM, Lawrence Rosen <lrosen@rosenlaw.com> wrote:

> Henri Yandell wrote me privately:
> > I'll be interested in your thoughts on my recent post to legal-discuss
> identifying my current thought pattern for how I see the three tiered
> split. I think it holds in OSS but am not sure if other licences on the
> proprietary/creative-commons side would need other ways of describing
> category-B (allowed, but only in these limited use cases).
>
>
>
> There should be no tiers. All FOSS licenses are acceptable for the
> collective works that ASF publishes through its independent software
> projects. (Who's talking about proprietary components?)
>

>
> ASF creates no derivative works. We own no programmers. Presumably
> contributors own their contributions. We only collect FOSS contributions
> and publish them as a collective work under ALv2 with a NOTICE file.
>
>
"A 'collective work' is a work, such as a periodical issue, anthology, or
encyclopedia, in which a number of contributions, constituting separate and
independent works in themselves, are assembled into a collective whole."  [
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/101]

How do the FOSS contributions constitute "separate and independent works in
themselves"?

Hen

Mime
View raw message