Noel J. Bergman wrote: > Daniel John Debrunner wrote: > > >>Noel J. Bergman wrote: >> >>>The files should all have the AL v2. The license file >>>provided includes the copyright. Any other notices, such >>>as historical credits, go into the NOTICE file. > > >>What does 'The licence file provided includes the copyright.' mean? > > > Sorry for not being clear. http://www.apache.org/dev/apply-license.html and > the license, itself, provide an appendix containing the copyright notice to > be placed in each file. Every source file should have that copyright notice > placed at the top.
To be picky the 'license itself' does not provide the appendix, it is in a file that contains the licence, in an appendix section *below* the term 'END OF TERMS AND CONDITIONS'. It seems to me that the appendix should not be in the license file itself, but instead on the apply-license page. Then in Ken's e-mail (message 362) he says that the appendix 'is directed to non-apache groups that are using the licence to protect *their* code, not to apache's own code'. Not sure if that is the case, it seems like the appendix applies to anyone (including ASF) who is using the Apache license. Especially since nowhere else on the Apache site do those instructions exist (that I can find). > As Ken explained in > http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/[EMAIL PROTECTED]& > msgNo=362, the copyright holder would be The Apache Software Foundation, > having received a copyright grant from IBM. I see no explanation in message 362 of why the copyright holder should be ASF. Message 363 does contain infomation that a determination was made 'from reviewing archives, the derby grant, and double-checking with the incubator chair'. But not an explanation. Also the term used by Jennifer (IBM's lawyer for ASF issues) was 'copyright license grant', not 'copyright grant'. And to repeat, for comparision purposes, under ASL v2 terms of 'grant of copyright license' (section 2) copyright statements must be retained (section 4c) when redistributing. As Jonas has said, without seeing the Derby grant it's hard to see what the correct outcome should be, when there are opposing views. Hopefully Geir can provide some useful information if he talks to Jennifer. I just want to ensure that the legally correct action is taken. Who knows who will own the original Cloudscape code copyright many years from now and may take action against ASF if the correct assignment was not made. [ Imagine a world in which only two software entities are left, Microsoft and ASF, MS having bought every other company :-( ] Dan.
pgpo8jHmpnXKN.pgp
Description: PGP signature
