www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alan Brogan (Created) (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Created] (LEGAL-105) Does Apache 2.0 allow use?
Date Wed, 26 Oct 2011 13:09:32 GMT
Does Apache 2.0 allow use?
--------------------------

                 Key: LEGAL-105
                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-105
             Project: Legal Discuss
          Issue Type: Question
            Reporter: Alan Brogan


This does seem like a naive question, so apologies in advance if it looks like I'm wasting
someone's time. OTOH I have spent a while looking at this already, and had my efforts reviewed
within my company and can still not find an answer, so I turn to the experts for advice.

Short version of the question is in the title, more detail:

The Apache License version 2.0 specifically claims to govern "use" of the relevant software
on the first line.
Version 1.0 of the same license specifically allows "use" by stating that "Redistribution
and use in ... are permitted".
Version 2.0 does allow "use" in clause 3, but "such license applies only to those patent claims
...". 

Given these three points I would not think it beyond possibility for a legal claim that the
lack of mention of "use" in clause 2 amounts to a denial of such license.

A colleague has suggested that clause 2's grant of license to "publicly perform" is tantamount
to license to "use", but such would not seem to cover entirely private use. Indeed the lack
of a "private" equivalent would seem to impose an obligation to make all uses of the software
public.

This does seem more like a naive question because there's not a lot of point to the other
licenses granted by clause 2 unless we can use the software we distributed, etc.

Further seems naive because http://www.apache.org/foundation/license-faq.html#License assures
me that ""It allows you to: freely download and use ...", but that page also disclaims that
"the actual text of the license itself is legally binding and authoritative", and I cannot
see that the license does grant license to use.

I thank you for the time it took to read this far, and hope you can find the time to point
out the obvious interpretation I cannot see.

-- 
Alan

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

        

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


Mime
View raw message