www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID>
Subject Re: Question about NOTICE and Copyrights
Date Fri, 09 Feb 2018 17:19:54 GMT
Hi Makoto,

I would not revert [1].  That would make it appear like you are moving
copyrights, and unless you are an agent of the folks listed, AIUI, you are
not supposed to do that.

The LICENSE and NOTICE in the META-INF folder for a jar is supposed to be
specific to the contents of each jar.  BSD dependencies are mentioned in
LICENSE not NOTICE.  So I would say that you should include the entire BSD
License in the LICENSE for that JAR or add another file containing the
LICENSE to the jar and point to it from LICENSE.

My 2 cents,
-Alex

On 2/9/18, 7:04 AM, "Makoto Yui" <myui@apache.org> wrote:

>Stian and Alex,
>
>Thank you for your comments.
>
>> The BSD license text need to be propagated also in binaries, so if you
>> do binary distros you would need to be careful.to comply with 2nd
>> clause of BSD.  (If you don't do binary distros this is a challenge
>> for downstream)
>
>I would need to place copyrights in NOTICE or LICENSE for binary
>distribution
>because copyrights in source headers (of borrowed codes) disappear
>from class file.
>
>So, it might be better to revert [1].
>In jar file, NOTICE and LICENSE are placed under META-INF/.
>
>I'm checking NOTICE/LICENSE in depth referring to your advice.
>
>[1] 
>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.co
>m%2Fapache%2Fincubator-hivemall%2Fcommit%2F25c712b47c1d8b7506889760b0aa7f4
>e0732568e&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cab3973207e084aeb2f7e08d56fce
>80aa%7C71f1da39c0a84d5a8d88a67b23c30bf4%7C0%7C0%7C636537855070528731&sdata
>=YgnjbvPSPyoXQQWe65jn3unwvGweQS99M2Gnlh5G5c4%3D&reserved=0
>
>Makoto
>
>2018-02-09 2:28 GMT+09:00 Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com.invalid>:
>> I'm not an official answer person on this list.  I have a different
>> understanding around moving copyrights from headers to NOTICE.  I don't
>> think it matters whether the source was previously Apache-licensed or
>>not.
>>  IIRC, the idea is that every line of code is copyrighted by the person
>> who wrote it or the company that person was working for.  At the ASF, it
>> was decided that it would not scale to have a long list of copyrights of
>> every person who patched a file after a bunch of different people had
>>been
>> in some source file.  So the ASF requests that all contributors agree to
>> not have their copyrights anywhere in the source (preferred) or have
>>their
>> copyrights moved to NOTICE.  Only the copyright holder or someone
>> authorized by that copyright holder can remove or relocate the
>>copyright.
>> That's why we generally don't touch the file headers of 3rd-party
>>source,
>> even if it is Apache-licensed.  Usually, nobody who is a committer is a
>> copyright holder or agent of the 3rd-party source, otherwise they would
>> probably donate it to the ASF so it isn't 3rd party and then move or
>> remove the copyright.
>>
>> In general, LICENSE and NOTICE should be as short as possible.  The goal
>> is to use LICENSE to reference 3rd-party code which is under different
>> license or not under the collective work copyright of the ASF.  So,
>> duplication should be avoided if possible.  You can often just point to
>>a
>> file with a header that contains the license or a file in a folder of
>> 3rd-party source that contains the license.  It isn't necessary to copy
>> the entire license to LICENSE.  Copyrights in BSD/MIT and 3rd-party ALv2
>> files can stay in those headers and be referenced by LICENSE because
>> that's the minimalist way of dealing with the requirements of those
>> licenses.
>>
>> The "may" or "need not" is, IMO, just a way to avoid saying "never" in
>> case some LICENSE does show up some day that we decide is best handled
>>by
>> moving some text containing a copyright to NOTICE.  If you click on the
>> links behind "need" and "not" you'll see the background behind these
>> decisions.  For the most part, the 3rd-party licenses you run into will
>>be
>> BSD/MIT/ALv2 and the way to handle them is well established.
>>
>> Of course, I could be wrong...
>> -Alex
>>
>> On 2/8/18, 2:49 AM, "Stian Soiland-Reyes" <stain@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>>You should generally leave the file headers in place. It is just
>>>recommended to move (copyright of) file headers to NOTICE when
>>>ingesting to the incubator a previously Apache-licensed source which
>>>would have the third-party license copyright header rather than the
>>>"Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation" ASF variant.
>>>
>>>The BSD license text need to be propagated also in binaries, so if you
>>>do binary distros you would need to be careful.to comply with 2nd
>>>clause of BSD.  (If you don't do binary distros this is a challenge
>>>for downstream)
>>>
>>>
>>>The end of your LICENSE in
>>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.
>>>co
>>>m%2Fapache%2Fincubator-hivemall%2Fblob%2Fv0.5.0%2FLICENSE%23L212&data=02
>>>%7
>>>C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C9afcb45ef52a4444fd3308d56ee1ad87%7C71f1da39c0
>>>a8
>>>4d5a8d88a67b23c30bf4%7C0%7C0%7C636536837911148053&sdata=aHYj0W6eDRunFrdZ
>>>vW
>>>tlRYtwpin3DJT8o9jqKSUufT4%3D&reserved=0
>>>seems to duplicate the Apache license several times for third-parties,
>>>I am not sure why - you just need to comply with
>>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.apac
>>>he
>>>.org%2Flicenses%2FLICENSE-2.0%23redistribution&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40a
>>>do
>>>be.com%7C9afcb45ef52a4444fd3308d56ee1ad87%7C71f1da39c0a84d5a8d88a67b23c3
>>>0b
>>>f4%7C0%7C0%7C636536837911148053&sdata=7Nki22R9xZBBNaZOZW9RZOadj1vEVbGD5K
>>>TH
>>>cODJVbQ%3D&reserved=0 for these
>>>third-party sources.
>>>
>>>I believe Justin has already linked you to
>>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.apac
>>>he
>>>.org%2Fdev%2Flicensing-howto.html%23permissive-deps&data=02%7C01%7Caharu
>>>i%
>>>40adobe.com%7C9afcb45ef52a4444fd3308d56ee1ad87%7C71f1da39c0a84d5a8d88a67
>>>b2
>>>3c30bf4%7C0%7C0%7C636536837911148053&sdata=oSp04PIVHbjb3iAzD%2FCFoUfH9GE
>>>o%
>>>2FlLHqGJAmoaTWys%3D&reserved=0 where
>>>it recommends to not include the third-party license statements
>>>directly in LICENSE, but rather include it as a local file in the
>>>repository that you can point to by file path from LICENSE. Obviously
>>>if you do a binary distro you will have to modify this accordingly to
>>>include those third-party license files where required.
>>>
>>>On 8 February 2018 at 05:57, Makoto Yui <myui@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> Hi Justin,
>>>>
>>>> I was thinking your -1 was related to NOTICE in [1,2].
>>>> You noticed me to fix NOTICE.
>>>>
>>>> Apart from jar issue (already removed), I would still like to hear
>>>> advice from ASF legal experts about NOTICE and Copyright issue to make
>>>> the NOTICE issue clear.
>>>>
>>>> I think including duplicate copyrights could be reserved in NOTICE as
>>>> far as seeing [3] and it's better to respect original copyright
>>>> holder(s) while you advised us to remove it and we follow it in [4].
>>>> Users can find copyright holders easily without checking all
>>>> distribution and ASF document [3] states that it *may* include (while
>>>> it need not be duplicated for BSD/MIT licenses and not clear for other
>>>> licenses).
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Makoto
>>>>
>>>> [1]
>>>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmail-ar
>>>>ch
>>>>ives.apache.org%2Fmod_mbox%2Fincubator-general%2F201802.mbox%2F%253CCAG
>>>>Jo
>>>>AUnQbbw%3DmAXmFyuHeOKVFGGwAaGaqSNBc7HoN_6OtHjO7g%40mail.gmail.com%253E&
>>>>da
>>>>ta=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C9afcb45ef52a4444fd3308d56ee1ad87%7C71
>>>>f1
>>>>da39c0a84d5a8d88a67b23c30bf4%7C0%7C0%7C636536837911148053&sdata=abXlOXI
>>>>gN
>>>>dRRHX8AfppKBuyxiSWYHd5BXeE2%2FkOqCoI%3D&reserved=0
>>>> [2]
>>>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmail-ar
>>>>ch
>>>>ives.apache.org%2Fmod_mbox%2Fincubator-general%2F201802.mbox%2F%253C2B3
>>>>8E
>>>>DEE-D92F-46AC-8292-4F9D6CCB5E12%40classsoftware.com%253E&data=02%7C01%7
>>>>Ca
>>>>harui%40adobe.com%7C9afcb45ef52a4444fd3308d56ee1ad87%7C71f1da39c0a84d5a
>>>>8d
>>>>88a67b23c30bf4%7C0%7C0%7C636536837911148053&sdata=CH3tlb9OyRN18erRp0jh4
>>>>Z9
>>>>%2F13LBp4Vqfu8m67tOgXo%3D&reserved=0
>>>> [3]
>>>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.apa
>>>>ch
>>>>e.org%2Fdev%2Flicensing-howto.html%23mod-notice&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%4
>>>>0a
>>>>dobe.com%7C9afcb45ef52a4444fd3308d56ee1ad87%7C71f1da39c0a84d5a8d88a67b2
>>>>3c
>>>>30bf4%7C0%7C0%7C636536837911148053&sdata=qyK9yGOOSqEgOKz90pqDK%2BQziadR
>>>>az
>>>>UJVmEZ7Y1Jr%2BY%3D&reserved=0
>>>> [4]
>>>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub
>>>>.c
>>>>om%2Fapache%2Fincubator-hivemall%2Fcommit%2F25c712b47c1d8b7506889760b0a
>>>>a7
>>>>f4e0732568e&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C9afcb45ef52a4444fd3308d
>>>>56
>>>>ee1ad87%7C71f1da39c0a84d5a8d88a67b23c30bf4%7C0%7C0%7C636536837911148053
>>>>&s
>>>>data=V12ws3z0GNP6iu4Sv0bFMY8JW1jlxyTLiN%2BltP6X3F4%3D&reserved=0
>>>>
>>>> 2018-02-07 19:46 GMT+09:00 Justin Mclean <justin@classsoftware.com>:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>>> I would like to ask ASF legal experts about NOTICE file formatting
>>>>>>and
>>>>>> the guidance of [1,2]
>>>>>> because we received "-1" vote due to L7-L12 of the following NOTICE
>>>>>> file [3] in the release voting in IPMC list [4].
>>>>>
>>>>> You received a -1 vote from me because you had a compiled jar in the
>>>>>source release [1].
>>>>>
>>>>> As I said on the incubator list I suggested you speak to your mentors
>>>>>and get them to help sort out the other license/notice issues. It’s
>>>>>likely you’ll get a speedier resolution if you do.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Justin
>>>>>
>>>>> 1.
>>>>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.g
>>>>>oo
>>>>>gle.com.au%2Fsearch%3Fclient%3Dsafari%26rls%3Den%26q%3Dlist.apache.rg%
>>>>>26
>>>>>ie%3DUTF-8%26oe%3DUTF-8%26gfe_rd%3Dcr%26dcr%3D0%26ei%3D4NV6Wqz3HOHc8wf
>>>>>H6
>>>>>ZjYAw&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C9afcb45ef52a4444fd3308d56ee1
>>>>>ad
>>>>>87%7C71f1da39c0a84d5a8d88a67b23c30bf4%7C0%7C0%7C636536837911148053&sda
>>>>>ta
>>>>>=Zln5L6Ff%2BflUNBZuSUgfiBurErfaokt7O5zG6SzcvjU%3D&reserved=0
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Makoto YUI <myui AT apache.org>
>>>> Research Engineer, Treasure Data, Inc.
>>>>
>>>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmyui.gi
>>>>th
>>>>ub.io%2F&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C9afcb45ef52a4444fd3308d56e
>>>>e1
>>>>ad87%7C71f1da39c0a84d5a8d88a67b23c30bf4%7C0%7C0%7C636536837911148053&sd
>>>>at
>>>>a=eG3GRCi4woIK9aC%2Bt41lsRbTAZHlrO%2B4OlD%2FKxZuI0s%3D&reserved=0
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>--
>>>Stian Soiland-Reyes
>>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Forcid.or
>>>g%
>>>2F0000-0001-9842-9718&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C9afcb45ef52a44
>>>44
>>>fd3308d56ee1ad87%7C71f1da39c0a84d5a8d88a67b23c30bf4%7C0%7C0%7C6365368379
>>>11
>>>148053&sdata=rDf6imJe5wbBbsMTBB8Trf46Wp8CLl6YtUX8frcdnlw%3D&reserved=0
>>>
>>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
>>>For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>>>
>>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>

Mime
View raw message