www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Justin Mclean <jus...@classsoftware.com>
Subject Re: Text in LICENSE for dependencies
Date Tue, 26 Jul 2016 22:59:01 GMT

> I have seen two different type of text in LICENSE for sub components included in source.

INAL etc… In the case of a source release and MIT it's likely that the text of the license
and the copyright owner are mentioned elsewhere (i.e. in a file header) and that’s all that
is legally required. See “The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be
included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.” [1] So legally there no
need to add anytime to a LICENSE file, it is however ASF policy to do so. (It also happens
to cover the terms of the MIT license for a convenience binary release)

So should the copyright owner be mentioned in LICENSE? It seems helpful but I can’t find
anywhere where that says it should be required.

> If the dependency were licensed under CC-SA 3.0, then is it still good to have or required?

You might want to read [2] as only some types of CC-SA licensed material can be included in
an Apache release.


1. https://opensource.org/licenses/MIT
2. http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#cc-sa
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org

View raw message