That would be like trying to put a license on the English language. See http://www.json.org/license.html <http://www.json.org/license.html>. It specifically mentions software. I suspect they are referring to the JSON library that uses the package org.json, as found at https://github.com/stleary/JSON-java <https://github.com/stleary/JSON-java>. We don’t use that anywhere.
Ralph > On May 23, 2017, at 10:10 PM, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote: > > From what I understand, it's the JSON format itself that has the "don't use > this for evil" clause which makes it technically not an open source license. > > On 24 May 2017 at 00:00, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> wrote: > >> AFAIK (IANAL), Jackson is ASL 2.0: >> https://github.com/FasterXML/jackson-core/blob/master/src/ >> main/resources/META-INF/LICENSE >> >> Gary >> >> On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 9:38 PM, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> So how much does this affect us? Is Jackson affected? Is JSON even >>> supportable in an open source fashion? >>> >>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>> From: Chris Mattmann <[email protected]> >>> Date: 23 May 2017 at 12:11 >>> Subject: Fwd: JSON License and Apache Projects >>> To: [email protected] >>> >>> >>> Dear PMCs@, >>> >>> Hi! As the new Legal VP, I am reminding everyone that the >>> grandfather exception for the JSON License and Apache projects >>> ended last month. As sent by Jim (our prior Legal VP) the relevant >>> text is below and I want to highlight the following statement: >>> >>> -- >>> If you have been using it, and have done so in a *release*, AND there has >>> been NO pushback from your community/eco-system, you have a temporary >>> exclusion from the Cat-X classification thru April 30, 2017. At that >> point >>> in time, >>> ANY and ALL usage of these JSON licensed artifacts are DISALLOWED. >>> -- >>> >>> Thank you for your consideration and attention to this >>> matter. >>> >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Chris Mattmann, VP, Legal ASF >>> >>> >>> From: Jim Jagielski <[email protected]> >>> Reply-To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> >>> Date: Tuesday, May 23, 2017 at 9:04 AM >>> To: legal discuss <[email protected]> >>> Subject: Fwd: JSON License and Apache Projects >>> >>> >>> Begin forwarded message: >>> >>> From: Jim Jagielski <[email protected]> >>> Subject: JSON License and Apache Projects >>> Date: November 23, 2016 at 9:10:39 AM EST >>> To: ASF Board <[email protected]> >>> Reply-To: [email protected] >>> Message-Id: <[email protected]> >>> >>> >>> (forwarded from legal-discuss@) >>> >>> As some of you may know, recently the JSON License has been >>> moved to Category X (https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved#category-x). >>> >>> I understand that this has impacted some projects, especially >>> those in the midst of doing a release. I also understand that >>> up until now, really, there has been no real "outcry" over our >>> usage of it, especially from end-users and other consumers of >>> our projects which use it. >>> >>> As compelling as that is, the fact is that the JSON license >>> itself is not OSI approved and is therefore not, by definition, >>> an "Open Source license" and, as such, cannot be considered as >>> one which is acceptable as related to categories. >>> >>> Therefore, w/ my VP Legal hat on, I am making the following >>> statements: >>> >>> o No new project, sub-project or codebase, which has not >>> used JSON licensed jars (or similar), are allowed to use >>> them. In other words, if you haven't been using them, you >>> aren't allowed to start. It is Cat-X. >>> >>> o If you have been using it, and have done so in a *release*, >>> AND there has been NO pushback from your community/eco-system, >>> you have a temporary exclusion from the Cat-X classification thru >>> April 30, 2017. At that point in time, ANY and ALL usage >>> of these JSON licensed artifacts are DISALLOWED. You must >>> either find a suitably licensed replacement, or do without. >>> There will be NO exceptions. >>> >>> o Any situation not covered by the above is an implicit >>> DISALLOWAL of usage. >>> >>> Also please note that in the 2nd situation (where a temporary >>> exclusion has been granted), you MUST ensure that NOTICE explicitly >>> notifies the end-user that a JSON licensed artifact exists. They >>> may not be aware of it up to now, and that MUST be addressed. >>> >>> If there are any questions, please ask on the [email protected] >>> list. >>> >>> -- >>> Jim Jagielski >>> VP Legal Affairs >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Matt Sicker <[email protected]> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> E-Mail: [email protected] | [email protected] >> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition >> <https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1617290459/ref=as_li_ >> tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=1617290459& >> linkCode=as2&tag=garygregory-20&linkId=cadb800f39946ec62ea2b1af9fe6a2b8> >> >> <http:////ir-na.amazon-adsystem.com/e/ir?t=garygregory-20&l=am2&o=1&a= >> 1617290459> >> JUnit in Action, Second Edition >> <https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1935182021/ref=as_li_ >> tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=1935182021& >> linkCode=as2&tag=garygregory-20&linkId=31ecd1f6b6d1eaf8886ac902a24de418%22 >>> >> >> <http:////ir-na.amazon-adsystem.com/e/ir?t=garygregory-20&l=am2&o=1&a= >> 1935182021> >> Spring Batch in Action >> <https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1935182951/ref=as_li_ >> tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=1935182951& >> linkCode=%7B%7BlinkCode%7D%7D&tag=garygregory-20&linkId=%7B% >> 7Blink_id%7D%7D%22%3ESpring+Batch+in+Action> >> <http:////ir-na.amazon-adsystem.com/e/ir?t=garygregory-20&l=am2&o=1&a= >> 1935182951> >> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com >> Home: http://garygregory.com/ >> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory >> > > > > -- > Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
