On Jan 19, 2010, at 8:51 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote: > On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Anne Kathrine Petterøe > <yoji...@gmail.com> wrote: >> PPMC and IPMC, please re-vote on the following regarding copyright issue >> ESME-47. > > <snip> > >> 2. The Apache License block will be followed by a legacy comment (Only in >> files where the WorldWide Conferencing notice currently exists, except any >> files where user dpp has not made any contribution): >> /* * Portions Copyright 2009 WorldWide Conferencing, LLC */ > > <ipmc-hat><legal-hat><ianal> > > if this language has not been cleared with our lawyers on legal-private then : > > * i'm -1 on this phrasing > * please raise a legal JIRA for appropriate language >
As others have said, this has been discussed at length on legal-discuss. The "lawyers" have expressed their opinion (that it mostly doesn't matter). I think requesting a Jira issue for this is a bad idea because a) it is highly unlikely that the result will be different and b) legal Jira issues aren't noted for being resolved quickly and c) Jira issues are resolved by lawyers. I suggest you review the thread that was provided and then see if you want to reconsider your veto. Ralph --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
