www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net>
Subject Re: JSON License and Apache Projects
Date Wed, 23 Nov 2016 20:34:25 GMT
On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 2:07 PM, John D. Ament <johndament@apache.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 1:16 PM Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 12:21 PM, Justin Mclean
>> <justin@classsoftware.com> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> >> MIT is OSI certified, compatible with the GPL, and category A.
>> >>
>> >> The JSON license is not OSI certified, not compatible with the GPL,
>> >> and (now) category X.
>> >
>> > Yep no disagreement from me there.
>> >
>> > I should of said it’s based of the text of the MIT license plus the “Do
>> > good not evil bit” which it probably why the pom states MIT.
>>
>> All apples are fruit, but not all fruit are apples.
>>
>> Religions, Species, and Software Licenses are all examples of
>> categories where having a "common ancestor" doesn't mean that two
>> instances of the superclass are compatible.
>>
>> The POM is misleading to the point of being unhelpful and incorrect.
>
>
>
> Just wondering, what POM are you looking at? The true pom has this for its
> license:
>
> <licenses>
>     <license>
>       <name>provided without support or warranty</name>
>       <url>http://www.json.org/license.html</url>
>     </license>
>   </licenses>
>
> This is the 20090211 version.  Similar for the 20080701 version.  Prior to
> it had no license declaration.

Here is the link provided earlier in the thread:

https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.codeartisans/org.json/20150729

That page indicates that the JAR is made available under the MIT and
Apache licenses.

- Sam Ruby

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


Mime
View raw message