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 21:37:52 GMT
On Sat, Aug 1, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Lawrence Rosen <lrosen@rosenlaw.com> wrote:

> Henri Yandell wrote:
> > What I mean is that most contributions are derivative works
> > of the Apache product they are contributing to.
> That is a level of recursion (and time travel) that I never imagined. My
> imagination is weak. But I'll grant the hypothetical.
> It is always true that a derivative work of an ALv2-licensed Apache
> project may be contributed back to us under ALv2 or any other appropriate
> FOSS license. This is good!


No time travel.


Here we see an arbitrarily chosen contribution. See how the text in the
contribution (arguably the + lines) bears a resemblance to the state before
(the - lines). Contribution is a derivative work of the Apache product.


So I'm struggling to understand why you would say that Apache products are
a collection of contributions, and focus on collective works with your
analysis of how other FOSS licenses interplay, when contributions are not
separate & independent from each other. It seems that you should be
proposing policy for the 'worst case' of a single work/derivative work, not
the simpler case of collective works.


View raw message