cross-pollenation (Comments on GPLv3)

[Anton Tagunov <an...@umail.ru>]

Hi!

Jeffrey> Apache code can be taken and dropped in the middle
Jeffrey> of GPLv3 projects (since Apache's license
Jeffrey> is liberal and allows Derivative Works to be relicensed),
Jeffrey> but GPLv3 code cannot be taken and dropped into Apache
Jeffrey> projects, as the GPLv3 would require that the original
Jeffrey> Apache code be relicensed under GPLv3.

Jeffrey> If a GPLv3 project takes some Apache code and evolves it,
Jeffrey> the Apache committers need to be on the
Jeffrey> lookout for people trying to contribute those
Jeffrey> changes back to Apache by mistake.

1) What if only the actual authors of the changes are allowed
to contribute them back? They would dual-license their changes:
GPLv3 (for their home project) and ASL (for Apache).

2) BTW how is ASF okay with third party patches
if the patch authors haven't yet signed the paper?

Jeffrey> I don't know how they are going to do that since the
Jeffrey> code will likely still have the Apache copyright and
Jeffrey> license notice in it.

3) Wouldn't it be very strange for GPL project _not to change_
the license? If they haven't changed they've screwed up haven't they?

cheers,
Anton

---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only.  Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF.  See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org

Re: cross-pollenation (Comments on GPLv3)

[Jeffrey Thompson <jt...@us.ibm.com>]

"Anton Tagunov" <an...@umail.ru> wrote on 06/18/2007 01:42:37 PM:

> Hi!
Hi 

> Jeffrey> If a GPLv3 project takes some Apache code and evolves it,
> Jeffrey> the Apache committers need to be on the
> Jeffrey> lookout for people trying to contribute those
> Jeffrey> changes back to Apache by mistake.
> 
> 1) What if only the actual authors of the changes are allowed
> to contribute them back? They would dual-license their changes:
> GPLv3 (for their home project) and ASL (for Apache).

Certainly possible, but for practical purposes that would require the 
authors to declare the "dual-license" approach up front.  After a lot of 
changes are made, or many programmers contribute, getting those 
permissions would be troublesome.  It would certainly be better if the 
GPLv3 project authors recognized the Apache heritage of the code and took 
the affirmative steps to make sure that changes were available to Apache. 
I'm not sure that will happen.
> 
> 2) BTW how is ASF okay with third party patches
> if the patch authors haven't yet signed the paper?

AIUI, the fora in which patches are submitted include the requirement that 
the code be submitted under ASLv2.  Which is fine, as long as the 
submitter has the appropriate rights to do so.
> 
> Jeffrey> I don't know how they are going to do that since the
> Jeffrey> code will likely still have the Apache copyright and
> Jeffrey> license notice in it.
> 
> 3) Wouldn't it be very strange for GPL project _not to change_
> the license? If they haven't changed they've screwed up haven't they?

Depends on how thorough they are, but you are right, if they are 
completely accurate they would change the license references to GPLv3. 
Note that they still need to comply with the Apache license requirement to 
include a copy of the ASLv2 in the distribution.

Jeff 

Staff Counsel, IBM Corporation  (914)766-1757  (tie)8-826  (fax) -8160
(notes) jthom@ibmus  (internet) jthom@us.ibm.com (home) jeff@beff.net
(web) http://www.beff.net/