www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Craig L Russell (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (LEGAL-315) Why both Individual CLA and Corporate CLA?
Date Sat, 24 Jun 2017 13:37:00 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-315?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16061990#comment-16061990

Craig L Russell commented on LEGAL-315:

I believe that the ASF position and rationale are in fact explained on the licenses and FAQ
In future, feel free to reference 
http://www.apache.org/licenses/#clas and 
for the ASF position.

> Why both Individual CLA and Corporate CLA?
> ------------------------------------------
>                 Key: LEGAL-315
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-315
>             Project: Legal Discuss
>          Issue Type: Question
>            Reporter: Patrick Hew
> My employer is looking at how we can contribute to Apache software.
> Our lawyer has assessed the Corporate CLA and Individual CLA (https://www.apache.org/licenses/#clas).
She has provisionally assessed the Corporate CLA as acceptable to our organisation, but raised
a flag about the requirement that employees must also sign an Individual CLA.  Indeed, I note
that the Corporate CLA asks for designated employees to be listed.
> 1. Can the ASF change its position on requiring Individual CLAs from employees in addition
to Corporate CLAs, for contributions that are owned by the organisation?
> 2. Otherwise I _think_ that we might be happier if the employee could sign the Individual
CLA as (for example) 'Jane Pearson as employee of <organisation>' (or possibly 'Jane
Pearson for <organisation>'.  How does this sound?
> Many thanks,
> - Patrick.

This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA

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

View raw message