On 17/01/13 19:37, Fabio Aiub Sperotto wrote:
Thanks Andy,
In your link from Apache Software Foundation we can read:
"Apache 2 software can therefore be included in GPLv3 projects, because the
GPLv3 license accepts our software into GPLv3 works. However, GPLv3
software cannot be included in Apache projects. The licenses are
incompatible in one direction only, and it is a result of ASF's licensing
philosophy and the GPLv3 authors' interpretation of copyright law."
I'm not lawyer too :-(
But, is compatible in one direction, and this is my direction. Jena under
Apache, my .jar library in GPLv3. So I can use GPLv3 in my project, someone
disagree?
That is my understanding; also includes if you use source code from
Jena, not just the binaries.
A combined work ("the product") of a project that has ASL and GPLv3
components will have to ship as GPLv3 - the GPL "virus" effect. That
some things it gathers together are ASL, BSD and some others does not
matter. The source code of the project has to fit with GPLv3.
ASF (legal entity, the non-profit foundation) only licenses its
"products", e.g. jena, under ASL. The Jena project can't use, depend on,
or reship GPL code, nor choose a different license (there is a small
corner case of optional implementations of interfaces).
or
Can I keep all under Apache license? But I don't know how this will be
affect the project in the future.
It will depend on what your project depends on. You can use the Apache
License independent of Apache - there are instructions at the end of
http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0#apply
For the future, I recommend keeping a detailed record of any code you
accept from others in case you need to get back to them later. You are
a long way ahead of many open source endeavours who do somewhat ignore
legal issues. Yes, they are a bit of a cost/nuisance sometimes but that
is the way the world is.
<insert disclaimer="IANAL"/>
Andy
