IMO, it depends on whether the Grant was executed correctly. I am not the expert like Bertrand, but I remember this from my incubation days: The initial code base was “owned” by Adobe, but was already open source and had accepted contributions from several people. Before I submitted the grant, I needed to convince the legal team at Adobe that all contributors had signed an agreement that gave Adobe the right to donate their contribution. That was, in fact, part of the contributors agreement folks had to sign before Adobe would accept their patches so we were good to go, but it left me with the impression that not all contribution agreements give the right to donate. In fact, for a portion of the code Adobe had received as part of an acquisition of a smaller company, the terms of the acquisition were not explicit that Adobe could donate the acquired code, so we had to go back and get signatures from the owners of the acquired code.
Some contributor agreements give one entity a license to use some code, but don’t give that entity the right to give others a license to that code. What documentation do you have on the agreement for the contributors of the CC files? -Alex From: Guillaume Laforge <glafo...@gmail.com<mailto:glafo...@gmail.com>> Reply-To: "legal-disc...@apache.org<mailto:legal-disc...@apache.org>" <legal-disc...@apache.org<mailto:legal-disc...@apache.org>> Date: Wednesday, June 17, 2015 at 3:09 AM To: "dev@groovy.incubator.apache.org<mailto:dev@groovy.incubator.apache.org>" <dev@groovy.incubator.apache.org<mailto:dev@groovy.incubator.apache.org>> Cc: legal-discuss <legal-disc...@apache.org<mailto:legal-disc...@apache.org>> Subject: Re: Groovy not allowed to include its "Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License" licensed documentation in the distribution? (was: Re: [Apache Creadur/RAT-206] Request to add support for Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike / wh... So given this grant, indeed, why do we even bother at all??? 2015-06-17 11:20 GMT+02:00 Bertrand Delacretaz <bdelacre...@apache.org<mailto:bdelacre...@apache.org>>: On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 10:23 AM, Guillaume Laforge <glafo...@gmail.com<mailto:glafo...@gmail.com>> wrote: > ...What is the process for asking people to relicense their contributions to > the documentation under ASL?... Actually, given that (IIUC) the docs that we are talking about have been donated under the Groovy software grant, asking the original contributors might not technically be needed. But it's good practice, I agree. > ...If I get an email from each of them saying they are okay with the > relicensing, is that okay?... I suggest creating a jira issue to keep track of that process, and document there the agreements that you get so that the whole thing is open and traceable. Emails sent to the groovy dev list sound ok to me. > ...(don't tell me they need to send me or scan me a real paper with a real > signature, etc)... If it was me I'd much rather sign everything digitally but that's not how it works so far ;-) -Bertrand -- Guillaume Laforge Groovy Project Manager Product Ninja & Advocate at Restlet<http://restlet.com> Blog: http://glaforge.appspot.com/ Social: @glaforge<http://twitter.com/glaforge> / Google+<https://plus.google.com/u/0/114130972232398734985/posts>
