www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Witt <joe.w...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: dependency on CDDL binary
Date Thu, 18 Feb 2016 04:13:36 GMT
Henri

Is it correct to say your response applies only to the source release?
 If they were to have a convenience binary release that bundled that
third party dependency then I believe the NOTICE would actually need
to reflect that CDDL licensed work as per [1] and specifically this
line "There are a number of other "permissive" licenses which are
approved for use by the ASF Legal Affairs Committee. Some of these may
require additions to NOTICE".  This is also of the understanding that
the CDDL is one of these 'permissive' category-A licenses [2].

If my understanding is correct I believe this is a good example of
where confusion can leak in regarding LICENSE/NOTICE handling.
Responses to these sorts of questions often do not specify whether the
guidance is for a source release or a convenience binary distribution
nor do the questions often specify one or the other.  So the guidance
tends to be about a source release and projects tend to follow the
source (largely non-bundled dependency) guidance and think it is
sufficient for their convenience binary distributions.

[1] http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html
[2] http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-a

Thanks
Joe

On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 10:53 PM, Henri Yandell <bayard@apache.org> wrote:
> Appropriately labelled.
>
> High-level-speak for:
>
> Make sure the users is aware that a CDDL licensed piece is included in the
> Apache work. Include the CDDL license, name of project, url to project.
>
> Or if only a dependency, then a note in the README to the effect that the
> project relies upon a CDDL licensed piece of work (url to project, name of
> project).
>
> Hen
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 1:23 PM, Jun Rao <junrao@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> We just realized that Apache Kafka started to have a dependency on Jersey
>> jars (https://jersey.java.net/license.html) since 0.9.0.0 released last
>> November. Jersey is dual licensed under CDDL and GPL. From Apache's website,
>> it says that it's ok to have a binary dependency on CDDL but the inclusion
>> must be properly labelled. Could you clarify what exactly properly labelled
>> means?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Jun
>
>

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


Mime
View raw message