www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Pierre Smits <pierre.sm...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: The license for readme files in the works of ASF projects
Date Fri, 16 Sep 2016 16:35:56 GMT
Thanks for the enlightenment of the change-over from ASL to AL, Greg...

For the rest, the answer doesn't do the question justice.

Let me explain this with following hypothetical example:

Apache HTTPServer (not to be confused with Apache HTTPD ;-)) is available
for forking through Github (you can find it here:
http://github/apache/apacheserver with a readme file (with a AL2 header
included). This hypothetical readme contains one single line stating: 'The
Apache HTTPServer(r) is the product of the same named open source community
under the umbrella of the Apache Software Foundation and delivers a fast
and flexible web server solution'.

Together with a hypothetical logo and the name (a registered trademark)
this readme strenghtens the brand of the product, the project and the
foundation.

Now, the repo is forked to a same named repo but in an other account (lets
say http://github/foo/apacheserver) and the content (except the license
header) is transformed into:

This product delivers a solution to produce web pages, is based on the
concepts in nginEx and is the result of the works of Wiley E. Coyote and
Sylvester T. Cat of Acme Corp.

Though in line with the AL2 (ability to modify the artefact), the displayed
result delivers a negative effect with respect to brand
recognition/reinformcement. Hence my question: is in such a case the AL2
license the right one for that particular artefact?

Best regards,


Pierre Smits

ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>
OFBiz based solutions & services

OFBiz Extensions Marketplace
http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/

On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Greg Stein <gstein@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 5:40 AM, Pierre Smits <pierre.smits@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Our ASL 2 license allows changes in the artefact that is governed by that
>> license.
>>
>> But is that the right license for readme files and other similar
>> artifacts enclosed in our releases?
>>
>
> There is no "ASL 2" license. There *is* an Apache License v2.0 ... we
> dropped the "S[oftware]" when going to v2 with the specific intent that it
> can be applied to things like README files and documentation. That it isn't
> just about code.
>
> Cheers,
> -g
>
>

Mime
View raw message