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: Dependency on OpenSSL
Date Tue, 07 Jun 2016 20:34:24 GMT
On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 6:11 PM, Craig Russell <craig.russell@oracle.com>
wrote:

> Hi Bill,
>
> On Jun 6, 2016, at 9:37 AM, William A Rowe Jr <wrowe@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 6:47 AM, Jim Jagielski <jim@jagunet.com> wrote:
>
>> BSD-4 should be Cat-X *except* for those projects, such as OpenSSL, etc
>> that have agreed that NOTICE is sufficient.
>>
>
> So look back to CC-BY Attribution 3.0 license…
>
>
> clr: I assume you mean CC-SA here
>

Correct, thanks.


> http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#cc-sa
>
>    1. If You Distribute, or Publicly Perform the Work or any Adaptations
>    or Collections, You must, unless a request has been made pursuant to
>    Section 4(a), keep intact all copyright notices for the Work and provide,
>    reasonable to the medium or means You are utilizing: (i) the name of the
>    Original Author (or pseudonym, if applicable) if supplied, and/or if the
>    Original Author and/or Licensor designate another party or parties (e.g., a
>    sponsor institute, publishing entity, journal) for attribution
>    ("Attribution Parties") in Licensor's copyright notice, terms of service or
>    by other reasonable means, the name of such party or parties; (ii) the
>    title of the Work if supplied; (iii) to the extent reasonably practicable,
>    the URI, if any, that Licensor specifies to be associated with the Work,
>    unless such URI does not refer to the copyright notice or licensing
>    information for the Work; and (iv) , consistent with Ssection 3(b), in the
>    case of an Adaptation, a credit identifying the use of the Work in the
>    Adaptation (e.g., "French translation of the Work by Original Author," or
>    "Screenplay based on original Work by Original Author"). The credit
>    required by this Section 4(c) may be implemented in any reasonable manner;
>    provided, however, that in the case of a Adaptation or Collection, at a
>    minimum such credit will appear, if a credit for all contributing authors
>    of the Adaptation or Collection appears, then as part of these credits and
>    in a manner at least as prominent as the credits for the other contributing
>    authors. For the avoidance of doubt, You may only use the credit required
>    by this Section for the purpose of attribution in the manner set out above
>    and, by exercising Your rights under this License, You may not implicitly
>    or explicitly assert or imply any connection with, sponsorship or
>    endorsement by the Original Author, Licensor and/or Attribution Parties, as
>    appropriate, of You or Your use of the Work, without the separate, express
>    prior written permission of the Original Author, Licensor and/or
>    Attribution Parties.
>
> I don't read that NOTICE alone can satisfy this requirement,
>
>
> clr: I *do* read it that having an Apache NOTICE satisfies the
> requirement (assuming that the copyright notices are also available)
>

I take issue with "Screenplay based on original Work by Original Author"...
which
is very similar to how many Vendors *choose* (are not required) to brand
their
ASF-derived software as "Foo Thing, based on Apache Bar". This would seem
to require such an attribution, not only in advertising copy, but in the
actual name
of a forked work or description of the combined work.

I do note that we don't actually permit *forks* of CC-SA Attribution works,
only
to bundle or depend upon them.

> it is yet another
> Advertising clause by another name.  E.g. if a project ships "Ray's
> Magnificent
> Random Number Generator" (RMRNG), and it was licensed as CREATIVE
> COMMONS ATTRIBUTION-SHARE ALIKE WORKS- then it isn't enough to
>
> simply credit the author, but that the name of the original work and
> attribution
> of the author must sit alongside other titles and credits, including in
> some
> cases, the actual name of the ASF project, right?
>
>
> clr: The first line in the NOTICE file is attribution to the Apache
> project. Subsequent lines in the NOTICE file that reference the CC-BY work
> are “at least as prominent”.
>

That applies to a source tarball, what about the other materials (e.g.
download
link on the downloads page of said combined binary, or project descriptive
text?)

Mime
View raw message