Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-legal-discuss-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-legal-discuss-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 79FE817362 for ; Sat, 1 Aug 2015 16:52:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 54122 invoked by uid 500); 1 Aug 2015 16:52:52 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-legal-discuss-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 53962 invoked by uid 500); 1 Aug 2015 16:52:52 -0000 Mailing-List: contact legal-discuss-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: Reply-To: legal-discuss@apache.org List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list legal-discuss@apache.org Received: (qmail 53943 invoked by uid 99); 1 Aug 2015 16:52:51 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO spamd1-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 01 Aug 2015 16:52:51 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd1-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd1-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 3B3EDD987A for ; Sat, 1 Aug 2015 16:52:51 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd1-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 2.897 X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.897 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd1-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=microsoft.com Received: from mx1-eu-west.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd1-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.7]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MXTMtrbJPBDi for ; Sat, 1 Aug 2015 16:52:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn1bon0133.outbound.protection.outlook.com [157.56.111.133]) by mx1-eu-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-eu-west.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 426B021231 for ; Sat, 1 Aug 2015 16:52:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from BY2PR03MB491.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.141.142.21) by BY2PR03MB460.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.141.141.148) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.231.11; Sat, 1 Aug 2015 16:52:43 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=selector1; h=From:To:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=CXUB9GxiT+qVWa9AAofnCvXTgcmipJt3YtmeyVay+Jk=; b=FCCpcKD+uk0TNyLQa9RmgjxboP3tuVfoWhQ9W8G4WeJdBY2ejVwpTlvRiQAoNVXNLRbAtO5lmsZym6vdF3Zf92NgYfst4Nn4sRy6SHQEMvuRhV5NeaBVxn2vDq41dv5idLcGFt+X1ZV2vbtNdT6g8s6Q0d8c6KmhYW2Wf3S91IU= Received: from BY2PR03MB490.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.141.142.20) by BY2PR03MB491.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.141.142.21) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.231.11; Sat, 1 Aug 2015 16:52:41 +0000 Received: from BY2PR03MB490.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.142.20]) by BY2PR03MB490.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.142.20]) with mapi id 15.01.0231.011; Sat, 1 Aug 2015 16:52:41 +0000 From: Ross Gardler To: "legal-discuss@apache.org" , "lrosen@rosenlaw.com" Subject: RE: Third Party FOSS licenses Thread-Topic: Third Party FOSS licenses Thread-Index: AdDMcxM7Lh2+krufQNa3F+2jcFDvVAAB2e/G Date: Sat, 1 Aug 2015 16:52:41 +0000 Message-ID: References: <083101d0cc73$a1fd6cf0$e5f846d0$@rosenlaw.com> In-Reply-To: <083101d0cc73$a1fd6cf0$e5f846d0$@rosenlaw.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: apache.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none; x-originating-ip: [50.106.12.220] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1;BY2PR03MB491;5:DQMUQxT/Oc46/01WrtJO0597Ta0v+PN6LHBoWxqcMWPCdGdMYWvJ+iMqNSL+zpQ0GiEW+hoKNwXb+SYnE2C7C9BXNRcRx8/Tn6yM/yuvBPFWiI7G5tGrHNm+2UnSqTSLj1n+v++Q8prMXncHNZ5ffg==;24:x73IgM0eebpmTLrqzfgwvJR+bnXUz7y2W+ShSxd/Nk1giicF702jBD3WtiGuz3lRgykJAo0E5oaKjOy+ZSoH9F742dtaz0wGQak62KNqXI0=;20:002nvG3r0tt8yXLHsaHi9AYYzOagQ0PW53tlnffIQN+9tZhcmNKJVB6V81X6hUibdcpzIEJ0BDSE63OpbYTNrA== x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BY2PR03MB491;UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BY2PR03MB460; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:; x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:(601004)(2401001)(5005006)(3002001);SRVR:BY2PR03MB491;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BY2PR03MB491; x-forefront-prvs: 0655F9F006 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM;SFS:(10019020)(377454003)(19580405001)(99286002)(86362001)(19625215002)(2900100001)(77156002)(2950100001)(102836002)(40100003)(33656002)(76576001)(62966003)(5002640100001)(5003600100002)(87936001)(2501003)(122556002)(2656002)(77096005)(54356999)(10090500001)(19580395003)(189998001)(74316001)(5001920100001)(50986999)(46102003)(92566002)(66066001)(76176999)(5001770100001)(5001960100002)(16236675004)(107886002);DIR:OUT;SFP:1102;SCL:1;SRVR:BY2PR03MB491;H:BY2PR03MB490.namprd03.prod.outlook.com;FPR:;SPF:None;MLV:sfv;LANG:en; Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_BY2PR03MB49024D49C93EC2D6C400B9999890BY2PR03MB490namprd_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 01 Aug 2015 16:52:41.7165 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 72f988bf-86f1-41af-91ab-2d7cd011db47 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BY2PR03MB491 X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1;BY2PR03MB460;2:lb2zl6uguO4QzpDvCJs0oLhPFbQQm561Hoha1tH9rlMX0Lxw+DMLpQcsPdQCVM/EEZcCyzV1N/0mURxGnHmIW+FsNQJGKWAYq8rzygUNVJZfo6m5UrrfvtY6w0AUN7EUoXY/9ItE/KRK4wLdChvfmClQ+0hGZyyxlvQdEUFn9Bs=;3:z2HmcSa5KCxb0RYnlEbpopjFVQy9174W8O5h0tl6bj5HqZeBdCkHuhK6LhMk5W8jxRzFlyYRO3qhMzJBMXWoVwS4wDcB4z9qVqKj7N5uPHak00u12RBh13lLT94Masx2xIWcuL2W4iUL896H3n1A6g==;25:qBWwgstpEKQBk+TFO6/a8WVY9D85PgZ2hW3++Yk3gVryoW9YQY6nQEU51kIvxPQkyDhkrNcPUWhbcuUWKvVi06wJfLy6CGh/Qgm95KsWyeCU/oF65AyUJiXpDgKpVcOKsGydE2zCzfOHZouRqNoSrqfJeykyamcdI6fqRQH/aNOzW9yzzVfXaZ3qbYk7vqySNKxgk+SDszkqvw8K9hKzOpXMpDVsG3nzL72DRs4ZmKzsF+aDcP0uHwRcRvTj6XVpwKFVlBsQypG3Zw+t4QSXhA==;23:rvHvilN8lrP0RScV+bL/A+9/5YAIK4aRJDJMDSizJFYPUTY6FUTwixOh54umMoVZUmRw2aihB/aFXlh+gNzWaA3Bxsh6FmH7G7U+WYjh0CzMwXnz8VKyybRmQ9WYb2hiDGFvykSH5Olgve5F6fH6evZMlnFLWHMgVVm0A1F3uX28K3RBBjclj/3YCnZIuqq3 X-OriginatorOrg: microsoft.com --_000_BY2PR03MB49024D49C93EC2D6C400B9999890BY2PR03MB490namprd_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1256" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable We don't impose "our own unique FOSS license criteria upon our diverse and = capable community". We do impose a license policy that means our "less lega= lly capable" downstream users do not need to hire someone with a law degree= to understand how they can reuse our software. The two things might look the same but they are not the same. This has been explained over and over on this list. We understand that some folks with law degrees feel this policy is not nece= ssary. Those in our ranks qualified to do so even agree that legally it is = not necessary. However, there are far more people in the world without law = degrees than with. We aim to serve the majority, not the minority. To serve those without law degree we adopt a policy that ensures they can u= se our software in any way they desire * without* needing to consult a lawy= er. Your signature line is part of why this is the policy here ("If this w= ere legal advice it would have been accompanied by a bill.") Another reaso= n is that it takes time to do legal reviews. Time that slows software devel= opment and there for product/service innovation. I don't understand why we have to explain this quote so often. Sent from my Windows Phone ________________________________ From: Lawrence Rosen Sent: =FD8/=FD1/=FD2015 9:06 AM To: legal-discuss@apache.org Cc: Lawrence Rosen Subject: Third Party FOSS licenses Henri Yandell wrote me privately: > I'll be interested in your thoughts on my recent post to legal-discuss id= entifying 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 proprietar= y/creative-commons side would need other ways of describing category-B (all= owed, but only in these limited use cases). There should be no tiers. All FOSS licenses are acceptable for the collecti= ve 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 contribu= tors own their contributions. We only collect FOSS contributions and publis= h them as a collective work under ALv2 with a NOTICE file. That's more than enough for us to do without imposing our own unique FOSS l= icense criteria upon our diverse and capable community. /Larry Lawrence Rosen "If this were legal advice it would have been accompanied by a bill." --_000_BY2PR03MB49024D49C93EC2D6C400B9999890BY2PR03MB490namprd_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="windows-1256" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
We don't impo= se "our own unique FOSS license criteria upon our diverse and capable = community". We do impose a license policy that means our "less le= gally capable" downstream users do not need to hire someone with a law degree to understand how they can reuse our software.
The two things might look the same but they are not the same.

This has been explained over and over on this list.

We understand that some folks with law degrees feel this policy is not nece= ssary. Those in our ranks qualified to do so even agree that legally it is = not necessary. However, there are far more people in the world without law = degrees than with. We aim to serve the majority, not the minority.

To serve those without law degree we adopt a policy that ensures they can u= se our software in any way they desire * without* needing to consult a lawy= er. Your  signature line is part of why this is the policy here ("= ;If this were legal advice it would have been accompanied by a bill.")  Another reason is that it takes time t= o do legal reviews. Time that slows software development and there for prod= uct/service innovation.

I don't understand why we have to explain this quote so often.

Sent from my Windows Phone
From: Lawrence Rosen
Sent: =FD8/= =FD1/=FD2015 9:06 AM
To: legal-discuss@apache.org<= br> Cc: Lawrence Rosen
Subject: Third= Party FOSS licenses

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 tier= ed 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 limit= ed use cases).

 

There should be no tiers. All FOSS licenses are acceptable for the c= ollective works that ASF publishes through its independent software project= s. (Who's talking about proprietary components?)

 

ASF creates no derivative works. We own no programmers. Presumably c= ontributors own their contributions. We only collect FOSS contributions and= publish them as a collective work under ALv2 with a NOTICE file.

 

That's more than enough for us to do without imposing our own unique= FOSS license criteria upon our diverse and capable community.

 

/Larry

 

Lawrence Rosen

"If this were legal advice it would have been = accompanied by a bill."

--_000_BY2PR03MB49024D49C93EC2D6C400B9999890BY2PR03MB490namprd_--