On Sep 16, 2011, at 1:51 PM, Rob Weir wrote: > To see how much work we have on IP clearance, I ran RAT, with results here: > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/odf/pmc/ip-clearance/rat.txt > > Most of the issues flagged fall into these categories: > > 1. Test documents, in ODF format. I'm not sure what we can do about > them. We could put the license in the documents as metadata. But RAT > wouldn't know how to find the license in the metadata. Of course, in > the future RAT could be enhanced, to use the ODF Toolkit to find this > license. Or we could just treat test documents as binary files. > > 2. Maven's pom.xml -- we could add license as an XML comment?
Yes, at the top. David-Fishers-MacBook-Air:apache-poi dave$ cd maven David-Fishers-MacBook-Air:maven dave$ ls multisign.sh ooxml-schemas.pom poi-excelant.pom poi-ooxml.pom poi.pom mvn-deploy.sh poi-examples.pom poi-ooxml-schemas.pom poi-scratchpad.pom David-Fishers-MacBook-Air:maven dave$ more *.pom <?xml version="1.0"?> <!-- Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one or more ... > > 3. ODF's schema files, in Relax NG format. These are copyright by > OASIS, the consortium where ODF is standardized. The notice in the > schema is shown here: > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/odf/trunk/generator/schema2template/src/main/resources/examples/odf/OpenDocument-v1.2-csprd03-schema.rng > > This is used as input to the code generation, which is a build-time > process that generates a portion of the Java code directly from the > ODF schema. So the schema definition document is not part of the > runtime, though it would be part of our source code release. > > Note that this schema definition is not under an open source software > license, but it does have a license that allows unrestricted use, > redistribution, etc. as well as creation of derived works. But it > does have a restriction on modifications. > > I assume we'll need to take this to legal-discuss to get this classified. Yes. Apache POI has a similar situation with the OOXML schemas. The jar with the generated code is acknowledged with the following in the LICENSE Office Open XML schemas (ooxml-schemas-1.0.jar) The Office Open XML schema definitions used by Apache POI are a part of the Office Open XML ECMA Specification (ECMA-376, [1]). As defined in section 9.4 of the ECMA bylaws [2], this specification is available to all interested parties without restriction: 9.4 All documents when approved shall be made available to all interested parties without restriction. Furthermore, both Microsoft and Adobe have granted patent licenses to this work [3,4,5]. [1] http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/standards/Ecma-376.htm [2] http://www.ecma-international.org/memento/Ecmabylaws.htm [3] http://www.microsoft.com/interop/osp/ [4] http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/files/ECMA-ST/Ecma%20PATENT/ECMA-376%20Edition%201%20Microsoft%20Patent%20Declaration.pdf [5] http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/files/ECMA-ST/Ecma%20PATENT/ga-2006-191.pdf (Oh and I found something to fix - it is now ooxml-schemas-1.1.jar!) Regards, Dave > 4. Some configuration files, .properties, .vm, etc. We should be able > to add a license notice there. > > 5. A few Java files that lack a license header. I think we should > check their history in Hg, and establish their provenance. > > -Rob
