www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net>
Subject Re: Copyright and license questions
Date Thu, 03 Dec 2015 19:01:02 GMT
On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 5:41 PM, Roberta Marton <roberta.marton@esgyn.com>

> From apache documentation (http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html):
> *If the source file is submitted with a copyright notice included in it,
> the copyright owner (or owner's agent) must either:*
>    1. *remove such notices, or*
>    2. *move them to the NOTICE file associated with each applicable
>    project release, or*
>    3. *provide written permission for the ASF to make such removal or
>    relocation of the notices.*
> If this isn't ASF code, e.g. third-party acquired code, you are best to
both leave any source-embedded copyright/license on the sources
in place, following our typical ASF license header block (because
the combined work along with ASF modifications become AL 2.0
but do not supersede any prior license/copyright restrictions.)

> *Assuming once again that that the bundled dependency itself contains no
> bundled subcomponents under other licenses and thus the ALv2 applies
> uniformly to all files, there is no need to modify **LICENSE**.*
> *If the dependency supplies a **NOTICE** file, its contents must be
> analyzed and the relevant portions bubbled up into the top-level **NOTICE*
> * file.*
> What does it mean if the “dependency supplies a NOTICE file”?  In this
> context, is a NOTICE file the same as a copyright notice?
Where there is an advertising clause, the origin must be disclosed
in the top-level NOTICE. NOTICE is used only for mandatory texts
such as advertising. I can offer an example;

In http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/apr/apr/trunk/NOTICE we have
reflected all license notice requirements of the included third party
sources. In http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/apr/apr/trunk/LICENSE
we have appended all necessary third-party licenses found in these
third party sources.

> should I just remove the copyright notice since it is covered by Apache
> code

Yes if you are the copyright owner or their agent, and move any
necessary credit to NOTICE or README as applicable.

> -          should I add something to the notice file (and leave the
> copyright in the source as is), for example
> “This software contains code donated by <company name> licensed under
> Apache version 2.0, author <author name>”

If required, yes it goes in NOTICE, if not required, and desired by the
project, then README is probably the best choice for 'credits where
credits are due'.  We are finicky about credits only because the final
resulting work has far more credits than we have time to offer or to
maintain over the evolution of a code base.

> -          should I add this copyright information to the LICENSE file?

No, you should add the respective licenses other than AL 2.0.
(A license itself may be copyrighted, so include that, of course.)

I hope the examples above are helpful.  One caution, don't simply
link to an external license URL.  We want to embed the precise
license we sublicensed and can only do that if we know the text
won't be changed.  External URL's are risky in that respect.

View raw message