www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: "Apache-Runtime-exception-2.0"
Date Sun, 16 Jun 2019 19:06:15 GMT
I think that this is actually an exclusion of the applicability of the
license. They are saying that the generated code doesn't have APache
notification requirements.

On Sun, Jun 16, 2019 at 11:44 AM Hen <bayard@apache.org> wrote:

> I've proposed an alternative in terms of SPDX id.
>
> Is anyone concerned with the Swift licensing not changing the name of the
> license?
>
> Typically I would be worried that a license modifier is attempting to use
> our name to confuse the public that their licensed product is as desirable
> as it would be under our license; or that a license modifier is weakening a
> license while confusing the public that their license is as valuable to use
> as ours.
>
> In this case they are weakening the requirements of the license in a
> reasonable use case, so I don't feel it's an attempt to confuse the public,
> and they do not appear to be proselytizing their license.
>
> Hen
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 16, 2019 at 11:35 AM Hen <bayard@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> I'm going to object to the name. It makes it sound like we've published
>> this.
>>
>> https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/874
>>
>>
>>

Mime
View raw message