www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Eden (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (LEGAL-301) Attribution for Apache 2.0
Date Thu, 18 May 2017 07:11:04 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-301?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16015314#comment-16015314
] 

Eden commented on LEGAL-301:
----------------------------

Adam - I come to the same conclusions as you, although I wasn't as helpfully explicit in my
original post as you were in yours. When there is no NOTICE file I also fail to see any requirement
for attribution, which to me seems really odd and surprising. I would think that along with
distributing a copy of the license, providing attribution would be a definite minimum requirement.
I feel it would be helpful to a lot of us if the Apache organization could issue a clarification
regarding this. 

> Attribution for Apache 2.0
> --------------------------
>
>                 Key: LEGAL-301
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-301
>             Project: Legal Discuss
>          Issue Type: Question
>            Reporter: Eden
>
> Hi, where in the Apache 2.0 license does it indicate that I need to retain attribution
notices (assuming there is not NOTICE file) for binary copies I distribute (but have not modified)?
I intend to attribute regardless but would like to understand exactly where it appears in
the license. Many thanks. 



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

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


Mime
View raw message