FYI: http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#json
On Jul 11, 2010, at 7:03 PM,
wrote:
> Is the JSON license acceptable by Apache? It seems to be a variant of the
> Berkeley license:
>
>
> Copyright (c) 2002 JSON.org
> Permission is hereby granted, free of cha
These questions should be asked on legal-disc...@a.o. The good/evil thing,
while clearly seeming stupid, should be reviewed by someone on the legal
committee at the ASF. I'll forward there.
On Jul 11, 2010, at 7:03 PM,
wrote:
> Is the JSON license acceptable by Apache? It seems
5:02 PM
To:
Cc:
Subject: RE: JSON license
Can you clarify what is meant by "add this license to /legal"? And what
the update to NOTICES.TXT should look like? Something like this?
Apache Lucene Connector Framework
Copyright 2010 The Apache Software Foundation
This product includes softwar
LINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.
Karl
-Original Message-
From: ext Jack Krupansky [mailto:jack.krupan...@lucidimagination.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2010 1:45 PM
To: Wright Karl (Nokia-MS/Cambridge)
Cc: Grant Ingersoll
Subject: Fw: JSON license
Some feedback on the JSON license from within Lucid. Sound
Yes, that's fine.
But that Good/Evil clause... quite funny. How would that ever hold up
in a court?
Erik
On Jul 11, 2010, at 7:03 PM, > wrote:
Is the JSON license acceptable by Apache? It seems to be a variant
of the Berkeley license:
Copyright (c) 2002 JSON.org
Pe
Is the JSON license acceptable by Apache? It seems to be a variant of the
Berkeley license:
Copyright (c) 2002 JSON.org
Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of
this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal in
th
