On 1/6/07, J Aaron Farr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 1/6/07, Chris Howe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Scenario:
> A project (Project A) is set up on Source Forge by
> individuals as the only legal entities. Project A is
> setup under the Apache License V2. What would Project
> A need to do beforehand to ensure that all code
> committed to Project A's SVN is available for an
> existing ASF project to incorporate into it's code
> base in the following scenarios:
From a purely legal and policy standpoint, any AL2 licensed work can
be included in an ASF work. So all your situations should be fine
just by having the sf.net project use the Apache License. The only
tricky part is if a contribution is "significant" and that's only
because of policy not license restrictions.
I don't agree. Any AL2 licensed work can be included in an ASF
distribution, as a dependency. In terms of committing a piece of work
that is not under our IP (and is not covered by a CLA), the Apache
license doesn't make it a given. You would still need to submit a
grant or be covered by a CLA, and you would have to be responsible for
the IP of the work. (I think... :) ).
Chris' scenario seems quite tricky, the most obvious one I can think
of as a solution is to replicate the FSF structure of having the
ownership be assigned to another party (ie: himself). IANAL etc - but
I don't think the ASF CLA system gives us the ability to grant that
work to someone else - ie: we couldn't do the reverse of this and give
ASF work over to the 3rd party project.
Probably a good question for legal-discuss (?). I'm pretty sure I
don't grok all of the ramifications etc so hesitant to say anything
too strong.
Hen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
