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 0B5DE179F0 for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2016 19:53:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 19789 invoked by uid 500); 30 Jan 2016 19:52:55 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-legal-discuss-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 19584 invoked by uid 500); 30 Jan 2016 19:52:55 -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 19574 invoked by uid 99); 30 Jan 2016 19:52:55 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO spamd4-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 30 Jan 2016 19:52:55 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd4-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd4-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 10CD9C059F for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2016 19:52:55 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd4-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 2.981 X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.981 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[HTML_MESSAGE=3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=disabled Received: from mx1-us-east.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd4-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.11]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id U9tnaN5i4NiC for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2016 19:52:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp618.redcondor.net (smtp618.redcondor.net [208.80.206.18]) by mx1-us-east.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-us-east.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 3C4E2429C7 for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2016 19:52:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailproxy12.neonova.net ([137.118.22.77]) by smtp618.redcondor.net ({25934d7d-0c4d-4838-a484-2a3cc0768185}) via TCP (outbound) with ESMTP id 20160130195237149_0618; Sat, 30 Jan 2016 19:52:37 +0000 X-RC-FROM: Received: from [192.168.1.14] (ip72-201-43-179.ph.ph.cox.net [72.201.43.179]) (Authenticated sender: ralph.goers@dslextreme.com) by mailproxy12.neonova.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id CE56B3609C2; Sat, 30 Jan 2016 14:52:31 -0500 (EST) From: Ralph Goers Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_01B65AC4-62D0-4AC9-8F6E-97990BE147F6" Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\)) Subject: Re: ZeroMQ MPL Licensing plans? Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2016 12:52:31 -0700 References: <003e01d15b86$6c1e85e0$445b91a0$@acm.org> To: Legal Discuss , dennis.hamilton@acm.org In-Reply-To: <003e01d15b86$6c1e85e0$445b91a0$@acm.org> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104) X-DLP-ENABLED: 137.118.22.64/27 X-MAG-OUTBOUND: greymail.redcondor.net@137.118.22.64/27 --Apple-Mail=_01B65AC4-62D0-4AC9-8F6E-97990BE147F6 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 At the end of COPYING.LESSER there is this: Note: this exception relieves you of any obligations under = sections 4 and 5 of this license, and section 6 of the GNU General = Public License. What isn=E2=80=99t clear to me is what happens to section 2 of the LGPL. = The fact that it clearly states that you can =E2=80=9Ccopy and = distribute the resulting executable under terms of your choice=E2=80=9D = means to me that whatever distribution requirements there might be under = section 2 of the LGPL don=E2=80=99t apply. The way I read what is left of this license after the exclusion is that = it is no worse than the Eclipse license. Ralph > On Jan 30, 2016, at 10:48 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton = wrote: >=20 > I don't think there is anything about relicensing under the ZeroMQ = [L]GPL licenses. (I don't see any MPL licenses on those GitHub pages = and the actual steps to move to MPL are dependent on some matters that = may not be under anyone's control). >=20 > In my reading, ZeroMQ allows any containing application that is simply = depending on the library to be under any license. That is also pretty = clear in the addendum to the COPYING.LESSER file and in the README.md = License section. >=20 > Perhaps a better question is whether that provision on the ZeroMQ code = is sufficient for it to qualify as a special Category B exception = already. >=20 > - Dennis >=20 >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Ralph Goers [mailto:ralph.goers@dslextreme.com = ] >> Sent: Saturday, January 30, 2016 08:19 >> To: Legal Discuss > >> Subject: Re: ZeroMQ MPL Licensing plans? >>=20 >> Why not? As I read that license page the exception basically says >> =E2=80=9Cignore the LGPL, whatever license you are using is what this = library >> also uses=E2=80=9D. Their exception seems to toss out sections 4 & 5 = of the >> LGPL. >>=20 >> As I read it you can modify the zeromq library and you are required = to >> =E2=80=9Cpass along=E2=80=9D the special exception - which means that = it can be >> incorporated into a work under any license you want, which would = presume >> that if the license prohibits distribution of the source then that is >> fine. >>=20 >> Ralph >>=20 >>=20 >> On Jan 29, 2016, at 5:55 PM, Sam Ruby > > > = wrote: >>=20 >> On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 7:45 PM, Ralph Goers >> = > = > wrote: >>=20 >>=20 >> I am curious, https://github.com/zeromq/zeromq4-1 = seems to >> indicate that if you use it from an Apache licensed =E2=80=9Cmodule=E2=80= =9D that the >> zeromq library can then be considered to be under the Apache license. = Am >> I misreading this? >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> ... which would enable a third party to make modifications and = not >> release them under the terms of the original license? >>=20 >> I don't think that meets Jim's criteria: >>=20 >> https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal- = >> discuss/201507.mbox/%3C9B052E9F-E7A1-4B00-A5BF- >> 86333BC477EF%40jaguNET.com %3E >>=20 >> - Sam Ruby >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> Ralph >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> On Jan 29, 2016, at 11:45 AM, Philippe = Ombredanne >> = > > wrote: >>=20 >> On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 3:48 PM, Sam Ruby >> = > > wrote: >>=20 >>=20 >> Just a heads up... I'm exploring what it = would take >> for the Toree >> podling to either find an alternative to = ZeroMQ or >> to request a >> limited exception. No action required = yet, and >> I'll bring the >> discussion back here should it reach = that point. >> Meanwhile, I just >> wanted to make people aware that this = discussion is >> going on, and >> welcome anybody who wishes to = participate. >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> Sam: >> FWIW, you can see this licensing-related ticket = that I >> filed recently >> with ZeroMQ. >> https://github.com/zeromq/zeromq4-1/issues/77 = >> -- >> Cordially >> Philippe Ombredanne >>=20 >> = -------------------------------------------------------- >> ------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss- >> unsubscribe@apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss- >> help@apache.org >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> = ------------------------------------------------------------- >> -------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: = legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org = >> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss- >> help@apache.org = > >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> = ------------------------------------------------------------------- >> -- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org = >> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org = >> > >>=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org = > For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org = --Apple-Mail=_01B65AC4-62D0-4AC9-8F6E-97990BE147F6 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
At the end of COPYING.LESSER there is = this:
	=
Note: this exception relieves you of any obligations under =
sections 4 and 5 of this license, and section 6 of the GNU General =
Public License.
What isn=E2=80=99t clear to me is what happens to section 2 =
of the LGPL.  The fact that it clearly states that you can =E2=80=9Ccopy =
and distribute the resulting executable under terms of your choice=E2=80=9D=
 means to me that whatever distribution requirements there might be =
under section 2 of the LGPL don=E2=80=99t apply.
The way I read what is =
left of this license after the exclusion is that it is no worse than the =
Eclipse license.
Ralph

On Jan 30, 2016, at 10:48 AM, = Dennis E. Hamilton <dennis.hamilton@acm.org> wrote:

I don't think there is anything about = relicensing under the ZeroMQ [L]GPL licenses.  (I don't see any MPL = licenses on those GitHub pages and the actual steps to move to MPL are = dependent on some matters that may not be under anyone's = control).

In my reading, ZeroMQ = allows any containing application that is simply depending on the = library to be under any license.  That is also pretty clear in the = addendum to the COPYING.LESSER file and in the README.md  License = section.

Perhaps a better question = is whether that provision on the ZeroMQ code is sufficient for it to = qualify as a special Category B exception already.

- Dennis

-----Original = Message-----
From: Ralph Goers [mailto:ralph.goers@dslextreme.com]
Sent: = Saturday, January 30, 2016 08:19
To: Legal Discuss <legal-discuss@apache.org>
Subject: Re: = ZeroMQ MPL Licensing plans?

Why not? =  As I read that license page the exception basically says
=E2=80=9Cignore the LGPL, whatever license you are using is = what this library
also uses=E2=80=9D.  Their = exception seems to toss out sections 4 & 5 of the
LGPL.

As I read it you can = modify the zeromq library and you are required to
=E2=80=9Cp= ass along=E2=80=9D the special exception - which means that it can be
incorporated into a work under any license you want, which = would presume
that if the license prohibits distribution = of the source then that is
fine.

Ralph


On Jan = 29, 2016, at 5:55 PM, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net
<mailto:rubys@intertwingly.net> > wrote:

On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 7:45 PM, = Ralph Goers
<ralph.goers@dslextreme.com <mailto:ralph.goers@dslextreme.com> > wrote:


I am curious, https://github.com/zeromq/zeromq4-1 seems to
indicate that if you use it from an Apache licensed = =E2=80=9Cmodule=E2=80=9D that the
zeromq library can then = be considered to be under the Apache license. Am
I = misreading this?



= ... which would enable a third party to make modifications and = not
release them under the terms of the original license?

I don't think that meets Jim's = criteria:

https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-
discuss/201507.mbox/%3C9B052E9F-E7A1-4B00-A5BF-
86333BC477EF%40jaguNET.com%3E

- Sam = Ruby



Ralph



On Jan = 29, 2016, at 11:45 AM, Philippe Ombredanne
<pombredanne@nexb.com <mailto:pombredanne@nexb.com> > wrote:

On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 3:48 PM, = Sam Ruby
<rubys@intertwingly.net <mailto:rubys@intertwingly.net> > wrote:


Just a heads up... I'm exploring = what it would take
for the Toree
podling = to either find an alternative to ZeroMQ or
to request a
= = = = limited exception.  No action required yet, and
I'll bring the
discussion back here should it = reach that point.
Meanwhile, I just
wanted to = make people aware that this discussion is
going on, and
= = = = welcome anybody who wishes to participate.



Sam:
FWIW, you = can see this licensing-related ticket that I
filed = recently
with ZeroMQ.
https://github.com/zeromq/zeromq4-1/issues/77
= = = --
Cordially
Philippe = Ombredanne

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






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




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




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

= --Apple-Mail=_01B65AC4-62D0-4AC9-8F6E-97990BE147F6--