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 B0DAA187DB for ; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 19:01:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 52575 invoked by uid 500); 3 Dec 2015 19:01:20 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-legal-discuss-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 52414 invoked by uid 500); 3 Dec 2015 19:01:20 -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 52403 invoked by uid 99); 3 Dec 2015 19:01:19 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO spamd2-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 03 Dec 2015 19:01:19 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd2-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd2-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 888C81A5D09 for ; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 19:01:19 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd2-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 3 X-Spam-Level: *** X-Spam-Status: No, score=3 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd2-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=rowe-clan-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mx1-us-east.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd2-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.9]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jBJswWFKB78J for ; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 19:01:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-io0-f180.google.com (mail-io0-f180.google.com [209.85.223.180]) by mx1-us-east.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-us-east.apache.org) with ESMTPS id D857142AD1 for ; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 19:01:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: by iofh3 with SMTP id h3so91588514iof.3 for ; Thu, 03 Dec 2015 11:01:03 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rowe-clan-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=nJodu8GZwSjlpaunJ5i3SduwevgmFXtf/vHyMV1ZFpw=; b=mkO0HIDgUkrCe89Nn509Nq5RPI1yVdHwVcHu7lqW3QxMYpcCwfkNIWRFDkO2uKYQqg g+N5Vaa9JiyV4YWl0KhFNBYG9Xsgvyz/8ypi2hfxZGcNPT2jejqdmneU/KV1bNM12sX+ 5CVWdcCOj6TDRyRmzerYO+pTFqMz7L3etRU6+GEgrRgEnFH/lW1cWlJpJ9iA1GzbMjWh HBS8eMLIsYxa+ba3ok1ESWvJ+NK/F3hLyzo2FG2/G40l+P57vOHD5IswRUz31zmDua6u H8MY8ylKxUZi+jElEmZggn1eZXI1xTefTzSWoROJuyyl2ksq1nEhrRchQCm8Rpb7F9Hc fmXQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=nJodu8GZwSjlpaunJ5i3SduwevgmFXtf/vHyMV1ZFpw=; b=BpffHY0r0acXdxjQGwrsGF0Gsr4JZnVjTDj2cZ+U84uHtBjdQh7+0BT1ooFaURiuth 3OofFVMbMQFV07in0jIO/h3dL/4h62Cet6vWIMFqvkuBVg07+nNWZjgeaQlxwVS8OAo3 R4VWKvrv5+qW9W4R43jmjQVmBqHabft1ImPcytKqENp2T0TnK+04PSQQag3w+VRzylI3 4wgWl+XWfvf3P3f25Lk5Zhh34Oj4irkuW7S+hHMp5e4huReA067XxAXokMmEpnQVZmbr mWUsycMomUZtms9sIvUc8OvAcRTxMpnFG5pHLzeTZiLzKfvNUB357OB//jFp/lPjZshX Q1mg== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkvkH89ZtlEIbgzJtqq324Vq9trWkFaF2UiZPd+yevKwajxwIpfwgLMch7Wl48L/sUgHgeP MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.107.10.66 with SMTP id u63mr9631455ioi.86.1449169262689; Thu, 03 Dec 2015 11:01:02 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.107.62.136 with HTTP; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 11:01:02 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2015 13:01:02 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Copyright and license questions From: William A Rowe Jr To: legal-discuss@apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113f93be1f573b05260303c9 --001a113f93be1f573b05260303c9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 5:41 PM, Roberta Marton wrote: > > > 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 =E2=80=9Cdependency supplies a NOTICE file=E2=80= =9D? 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 > > =E2=80=9CThis software contains code donated by licensed u= nder > Apache version 2.0, author =E2=80=9D > 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. --001a113f93be1f573b05260303c9 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On T= ue, Dec 1, 2015 at 5:41 PM, Roberta Marton <roberta.marton@esgyn.co= m> wrote:

=C2=A0

From apache documentation (htt= p://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html):

=C2=A0

If the sourc= e file is submitted with a copyright notice included in it, the copyright o= wner (or owner's agent) must either:

  1. remove such notices, or
  2. move them to the NOTICE file associate= d 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 c= ode, e.g. third-party acquired code, you are best to
both leave a= ny source-embedded copyright/license on the sources=C2=A0
in plac= e, following our typical ASF license header block (because
the co= mbined work along with ASF modifications become AL 2.0
but do not= supersede any prior license/copyright restrictions.)
=C2=A0
Assuming once again that that the bundled depen= dency itself contains no bundled subcomponents under other licenses and thu= s the ALv2 applies uniformly to all files, there is no need to modify=C2=A0= LICENSE.

If the dependency supplies a=C2=A0NOTICE=C2=A0file, its contents must be analyzed and the relevant p= ortions bubbled up into the top-level=C2=A0NO= TICE=C2=A0file.

=C2=A0

What does it mean if the =E2=80=9Cdepen= dency supplies a NOTICE file=E2=80=9D?=C2=A0 In this context, is a NOTICE f= ile the same as a copyright notice?


Where there is an advertising clause, the ori= gin must be disclosed
in the top-level NOTICE. NOTICE is used onl= y for mandatory texts
such as advertising. I can offer an example= ;

reflected all license notice requirements of the i= ncluded third party
we have appended all necessary third-party l= icenses found in these
third party sources.
=C2=A0
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
nece= ssary credit to NOTICE or README as applicable.
=C2=A0

-=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2= =A0 should I add something to the notice file (and leave the copyrig= ht in the source as is), for example

=E2=80=9CThis software contains code donated by &= lt;company name> licensed under Apache version 2.0, author <author na= me>=E2=80=9D


If require= d, yes it goes in NOTICE, if not required, and desired by the
pro= ject, then README is probably the best choice for 'credits where
<= div>credits are due'.=C2=A0 We are finicky about credits only because t= he final
resulting work has far more credits than we have time to= offer or to
maintain over the evolution of a code base.
=C2=A0

-=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0= =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 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.=C2=A0 One caution, don't s= imply
link to an external license URL.=C2=A0 We want to embed the= precise
license we sublicensed and can only do that if we know t= he text
won't be changed.=C2=A0 External URL's are risky = in that respect.

--001a113f93be1f573b05260303c9--