www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Craig Russell <apache....@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Apache License question
Date Sun, 07 May 2017 00:11:45 GMT

The purpose of the license header is to alert users that the code is licensed under the Apache
license and to refer them to the complete license. The license header is specifically intended
not to conflict with the license, but to contain enough of a description that it's easy to
tell that this is a work licensed under the Apache 2.0 license.

You might not have seen this:


So even Apache projects are allowed to use a shortened form of the license header. Your example
below has more information than this short form.

This is not legal advice but the header is not a license. It's just a brief summary of the


> On May 6, 2017, at 2:02 PM, Flavio P JUNQUEIRA <fpj@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi there,
> This is not a question about an Apache project, but instead about a project that we want
to open source under the Apache license. The lawyers reviewing the project code for some reason
do not like the wording of the second paragraph of the license header that the Apache license
recommends projects to use:
> 	Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
> 	distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
> 	See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
> 	limitations under the License.
> They claim that the wording isn’t legally sound. I don’t understand how this is possible
given that this text exists verbatim in paragraph 7 of the license, but they seem to be uncomfortable
with it given that paragraph 7 of the license does say more.
> My question however is whether I can use only this text as the license header:
> 	Copyright [yyyy] [name of copyright owner]
> 	Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
> 	you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
> 	You may obtain a copy of the License at
>     		http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 <http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0>
> without a problem or whether that would violate the license terms in any way. As part
of the question, assuming this change is acceptable, I’d need to understand whether changing
the Appendix of the license file is acceptable, given that it is after the end of terms and
> I have searched the mail archives, but couldn’t really find anything that addresses
this. Any feedback here would be highly appreciated.
> Thanks,
> -Flavio 

Craig L Russell

View raw message