On 13/02/2015 Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
From: jan i [mailto:[email protected]] The copyright is Apache (see the ICLA) but you have the full right to use it. The ICLA transfers ownership to Apache, this is so that ASF can protect you in case of problems, if you owned the code ASF could not protect you, and ASF could not license it to others (the essence of ALv2). <orcmid> ... In particular, the copyright holder does not license the transfer of copyright to recipients of the license in the case of iCLA and also the ALv2. If ASF was a copyright owner of the contributed work, it could indeed make transfers to others. ... It is important that the idea of copyright transfer and of copyright licensing be kept very separate. ... </orcmid>
I confirm what Dennis wrote. There is a difference between a copyright assignment and copyright licensing. What I do when submitting the ICLA is: telling the ASF that it can use my contributed code under ALv2 forever; promising the ASF that I will only contribute code that I am entitled to contribute. The copyright on the code remains mine.
In case of problems with released code, responsibility falls on the PMC that was acting as an official body of the ASF (this is why a collective vote is needed); in case of problems with unreleased code, I suspect that the responsibility is still of the individual committer.
Regards, Andrea.
