www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "P. Taylor Goetz" <ptgo...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: JSON License and Apache Projects
Date Thu, 24 Nov 2016 00:18:52 GMT
(cc board@ so PMC chairs are included)

Thanks Jim for providing decisive, actionable guidance on the issue. Affected PMCs now have
unambiguous paths forward for addressing the issue.

If Jim has no objections, I'd encourage PMC Chairs to forward this to their respective dev@
lists, whether affected or not. It's a good reminder of both the importance and difficulties
of OSS licensing. It would also serve as a reminder of why the legal*@ lists exist and encourage
more individuals to follow those discussions.


> On Nov 23, 2016, at 9:08 AM, Jim Jagielski <jim@apache.org> wrote:
> As some of you may know, recently the JSON License has been
> moved to Category X (https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved#category-x).
> I understand that this has impacted some projects, especially
> those in the midst of doing a release. I also understand that
> up until now, really, there has been no real "outcry" over our
> usage of it, especially from end-users and other consumers of
> our projects which use it.
> As compelling as that is, the fact is that the JSON license
> itself is not OSI approved and is therefore not, by definition,
> an "Open Source license" and, as such, cannot be considered as
> one which is acceptable as related to categories.
> Therefore, w/ my VP Legal hat on, I am making the following
> statements:
>  o No new project, sub-project or codebase, which has not
>    used JSON licensed jars (or similar), are allowed to use
>    them. In other words, if you haven't been using them, you
>    aren't allowed to start. It is Cat-X.
>  o If you have been using it, and have done so in a *release*,
>    AND there has been NO pushback from your community/eco-system,
>    you have a temporary exclusion from the Cat-X classification thru
>    April 30, 2017. At that point in time, ANY and ALL usage
>    of these JSON licensed artifacts are DISALLOWED. You must
>    either find a suitably licensed replacement, or do without.
>    There will be NO exceptions.
>  o Any situation not covered by the above is an implicit
>    DISALLOWAL of usage.
> Also please note that in the 2nd situation (where a temporary
> exclusion has been granted), you MUST ensure that NOTICE explicitly
> notifies the end-user that a JSON licensed artifact exists. They
> may not be aware of it up to now, and that MUST be addressed.
> If there are any questions, please ask on the legal-discuss@a.o
> list.
> --
> Jim Jagielski
> VP Legal Affairs
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org

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

View raw message