www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Clebert Suconic <clebert.suco...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: JSON license again
Date Wed, 02 Nov 2016 00:27:14 GMT

On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 2:38 PM, John D. Ament <johndament@apache.org> wrote:
> Apache ActiveMQ Artemis was using json until feedback from debian, and we
> converted away.  I do agree, the ASF should treat this as a Cat X license
> unless we can petition the makes of json.org to relicense in a traditional
> BSD license.
> For the record, we switched to Apache Johnzon for the equivalent.
> John
> On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 1:50 PM Ted Dunning <tdunning@apache.org> wrote:
>> I know that this has been brought up, but I think that we have
>> institutionalized an erroneous decision. That decision is that the json.org
>> license is a Category A license.
>> The json.org version of the BSD license is problematic because it imposes
>> constraints on the downstream consumer by including a constraint on field of
>> endeavor that the software "not be used for evil". Debian and Google, for
>> instance, won't consume anything with this license:
>> https://wiki.debian.org/qa.debian.org/jsonevil
>> https://www.cnet.com/news/dont-be-evil-google-spurns-no-evil-software/
>> Apache has codified a policy that is apparently based on a determination
>> that the no-evil clause was "clearly a joke".
>> https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved#json
>> https://s.apache.org/json-license-ok
>> At work, we now have more than one customer whose legal team has decided
>> not to get the joke. I will be filing patches to remove those dependencies
>> from Hive and HCatalog, but the point remains that the json.org license
>> isn't acceptable to those customers.
>> To me, all of this clearly shows that the json license is substantially
>> hindering downstream adoption due to a perception by those downstream
>> consumers that you can't put a joke into a license. I, frankly, agree with
>> those folks. Not doing evil is a good thing and I try to do that myself, but
>> having to get a legal opinion that everything I do is not evil would make it
>> impossible to get anything done.
>> I think that this license should be moved to category X due to the
>> non-free nature of the license. There is a clean-room reimplementation of
>> the core part of the library available from the Android team so removing the
>> dependency. Using Jackson or Gson instead is another fine approach.
>> A quick look at maven central indicates that at least the following Apache
>> projects are affected
>> Tika
>> Hive
>> Wink
>> possibly Asterixdb (because hyracks had this dependency)
>> Shindig
>> Spark (transitive from Hive)
>> Giraph
>> Rave
>> Felix
>> Tuscany
>> Tinkerpop

Clebert Suconic

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

View raw message