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: Is it ok to put ASF header onto ALv2 compatibly licensed code?
Date Wed, 10 Aug 2016 01:13:33 GMT

> All of that is fine, but it doesn't address my original, much narrower
> question. So let me re-state:
> I have a file that is licensed under MIT but has no header file to say so.

In that case to comply with the legal terms of the MIT licence you must include the full text
of the MIT license and the copyright owner: [1]
"The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or
substantial portions of the Software."

It would also need to be made clear that that file was MIT licensed not APv2 licensed. The
issue here is that if a file doesn’t include a header it could be assumed that it’s the
file itself is ALv2 licensed (rather than the package as a whole).

INAL but I would either:
a) Add a MIT header to that file [1] (MIT compliance) and add a pointer in LICENSE [2] (ASF
b) Put the copyright owner/ full text somewhere [1] (MIT compliance) and add the file name
and a pointer to that in LICENSE [2] (ASF policy)
c) as b but add a note to the MIT license file saying it’s MIT licensed and perhaps a pointer
to the full text of the MIT license.

But as I said INAL and others may have differing opinions.


1. https://opensource.org/licenses/MIT
2. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#permissive-deps
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org

View raw message