www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net>
Subject Re: on consensus, and serenity and Eclipse
Date Wed, 12 Aug 2015 02:56:22 GMT
Larry - I think that fire over your mountain has got to your head. Man.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Aug 11, 2015, at 2:35 PM, Lawrence Rosen <lrosen@rosenlaw.com> wrote:
> 
> David Jencks wrote:
> > Can you detect that I am one of the members from which you have received such an
email explaining that i am happy with the current policy and explaining how the current policy
directly supports my employment?
>  
> Yes I can. And you received from me at the time an off-list response, also copied to
a senior copyright lawyer in IBM, asking for his clarification about IBM's acceptance of MPLv2,
ECL, and other FOSS and Creative Commons licenses. IBM is a big and important company, and
I certainly don't want Apache to adopt any licensing policies that would make IBM unhappy
or that affected your employment.
>  
> Unfortunately that attorney is now on vacation....  And when he returns he may not want
to respond publicly. :-)
>  
> /Larry
>  
> Bcc:
>  
> Lawrence Rosen
> "If this were legal advice it would have been accompanied by a bill."
>  
> From: David Jencks [mailto:david_jencks@yahoo.com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2015 2:19 PM
> To: legal-discuss@apache.org; lrosen@rosenlaw.com
> Subject: Re: on consensus, and serenity and Eclipse
>  
> Can you detect that I am one of the members from which you have received such an email
explaining that i am happy with the current policy and explaining how the current policy directly
supports my employment?
>  
> thanks
> david jencks
>  
> On Aug 11, 2015, at 4:49 PM, Lawrence Rosen <lrosen@rosenlaw.com> wrote:
>  
> Mark Thomas wrote:
> > What Larry can't seem to get his head around is that the membership is happy with
the current policy and - despite the points he raises - has no wish to change it.
>  
>  
> The only email I can find from you in my archives even remotely on this topic was dated
5/20/2015 and it discussed the compliance of our Tomcat 7 release notes with the Eclipse License.
 Perhaps I misfiled your comments. Please forward me any other email from you "that the membership
is happy with the current policy and - despite the points he raises - has no wish to change
it."  I do acknowledge having received some such email, but not from many members. Not many
at all!
>  
> Speaking of the Eclipse License, do you want me to start another thread about our willingness
to aggregate Eclipse code with ALv2 code? I am confident that a large number of companies
will approve that. I am confident that the Eclipse Foundation will not object.
>  
> /Larry
>  
>  
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Thomas [mailto:markt@apache.org] 
> Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2015 1:12 PM
> To: legal-discuss@apache.org
> Subject: Re: on consensus, and serenity
>  
> On 11/08/2015 20:53, Tim Williams wrote:
> > I'm curious how we can work ourselves out of this nagging cycle of
> > Larry encouraging us to be more liberal in our licenses because we
> > legally can and us responding with we don't want to even if we could
> > legally get away with it?
> >
> > By my count, four out of the previous four months have seen this same
> > cycle in only slightly different forms.  I'm confident a quick mail
> > search would find at least as many months out of the previous four
> > years.  And, these tend to be long (>50) threads.
> >
> > I support challenging the status quo, questioning policies, etc. In
> > fact, I believe it makes us stronger and a good rigorous debate on
> > core values helps newcomers to understand the Apache Way and our
> > culture in a deeper way.  It's healthy community behavior and
> > old-timers mostly don't mind helping folks understand the "why" behind
> > a given policy.
> >
> > However, it's not healthy to keep asking the same question, over and
> > over, even while receiving the same answer each time.  It's neither
> > fun nor fruitful. Were it a technical issue, we could reason through
> > it and move on much more easily.
> >
> > So, I wonder how we might re-assure Larry that his voice has been
> > heard but also allow us not to keep reading the same argument over and
> > over?
>  
> The lengthy replies to each of the multiple times Larry has raised this point should
be more than enough to convince him his voice has been heard.
>  
> What Larry can't seem to get his head around is that the membership is happy with the
current policy and - despite the points he raises - has no wish to change it.
>  
> > I've thought perhaps a referendum membership vote (with steve) might
> > help? or maybe an explicit vote by the board [vs implicit by keeping
> > Jim around:)] or, ?
>  
> More than enough time has been wasted repeatedly responding to Larry only for him to
ignore responses he doesn't like. We don't need to waste more time trying to appease Larry.
If Larry wants to try and raise this at the annual members meeting he is free to do so. I
note he has asked again today for folks employed by big companies to speak up with their views
on his proposal. Several of us already have (in favour of the current policy) and he continues
to ignore those posts.
>  
> At this point Larry's behaviour is best categorised as trolling and should be treated
as such. If the trolling behaviour continues then I'll treat it the same way I'd treat it
on any other ASF list: by unsubscribing the troll.
>  
> Mark
>  
>  
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>  

Mime
View raw message