On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 12:12 AM, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 5/19/08, Frank Bille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Yes but shouldn't we know what license they are on, if they are not >> owned by Thoof? > > So you don't trust the signature by the CTO/CEO of Thoof that the > contributed software is theirs, and that they don't necessarily hold > all rights to said IP even though they clearly have stated such? > > The software grant explicitly states that all the IP in the > distribution that is covered by said grant is owned by Thoof, or that > they have the rights to transfer the distribution rights to the Apache > Software Foundation. > > What more do you want from them? Another paper trail? And why would > you trust that then?
I guess you are right. I'm just worried about this: Someone at Thoof overlooks that one or more of the images are really propritary[0], or is just under CC sharealike. We receive them and release all of it under ASL. Some crazy artist with too much spare time find out that we have relicensed his little kitten image under ASL and sue ASF for ONE TRILLION DOLLORS. Something like that. Frank [0]: I keep talk about the images and not the source code because I would be more likely to think of a software grant as source code rather than source code AND images. But hopefully other people think otherwise.
