www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Richard Eckart de Castilho <...@apache.org>
Subject Re: SGA Alterations
Date Tue, 15 Dec 2015 13:58:14 GMT
On 14.12.2015, at 18:18, Todd Lipcon <todd@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> Could you please review the changes in the attached doc and let us know if this will
be OK from the ASF side?

I don't speak officially, but the following change to me also looks like a breaker.

"2. Licensor represents that, to Licensor's present knowledge, **and with no investigation**,
Licensor is legally entitled to grant the above license."

People submitting an SGA should have done their due diligence to make sure they are entitled
to grant the license. Stating that "no investigation" was performed sound to me like "here
you have the code, but actually I have no idea if I can actually give it to you and I don't
care really too much either".

Cheers,

-- Richard


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


Mime
View raw message