You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to license@apache.org by "Roy T. Fielding" <fi...@apache.org> on 2003/12/24 13:16:06 UTC
Re: Review of proposed Apache License, version 2.0
Thank you all for your comments on the proposed license. I have
incorporated as much of the changes as possible and posted a new
version on the site
http://www.apache.org/licenses/proposed/
Note that I have only updated the proposed 2.0 and Individual CLA
licenses so far -- the others will have to wait until I find some
time during the holidays. I include the current revision (1.23)
below for your convenience.
Cheers,
Roy T. Fielding, co-founder, The Apache Software Foundation
(fielding@apache.org) <http://roy.gbiv.com/>
========================================================================
=
== DO NOT PANIC! This is a draft for discussion purposes only.
==
== It has not yet been approved. It does not yet apply to any
==
== software distributed by the Apache Software Foundation.
==
==
==
== This version combines a contributor license with the copyright
==
== license, allowing us to describe the patent license given by
==
== contributors to the ASF and users of their contributions, and
==
== explicitly stating the community's expectation on submittal
==
== of future contributions.
==
====================================+===================================
=
Apache License
Version 2.0, December 2003
http://www.apache.org/licenses/
TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR USE, REPRODUCTION, AND DISTRIBUTION
1. Definitions.
"License" shall mean the terms and conditions for use,
reproduction,
and distribution as defined by Sections 1 through 9 of this
document.
"Licensor" shall mean the copyright owner or entity authorized by
the copyright owner that is granting the License.
"Legal Entity" shall mean the union of the acting entity and all
other entities that control, are controlled by, or are under
common
control with that entity. For the purposes of this definition,
"control" means (i) the power, direct or indirect, to cause the
direction or management of such entity, whether by contract or
otherwise, or (ii) ownership of fifty percent (50%) or more of the
outstanding shares, or (iii) beneficial ownership of such entity.
"You" (or "Your") shall mean an individual or Legal Entity
exercising permissions granted by this License.
"Source" form shall mean the preferred form for making
modifications,
including but not limited to software source code, documentation
source, and configuration files.
"Object" form shall mean any form resulting from mechanical
transformation or translation of a Source form, including but
not limited to compiled object code, generated documentation,
and conversions to other media types.
"Work" shall mean the work of authorship, whether in Source or
Object form, made available under the License, as indicated by a
copyright notice that is included in or attached to the work
(an example is provided in the Appendix below).
"Derivative Works" shall mean any work, whether in Source or
Object
form, that is based on (or derived from) the Work and for which
the
editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other
modifications
represent, as a whole, an original work of authorship. For the
purposes
of this License, Derivative Works shall not include works that
remain
separable from, or merely link (or bind by name) to the
interfaces of,
the Work and Derivative Works thereof.
"Contribution" shall mean any original work of authorship,
including
the original version of the Work and any modifications or
additions
to that Work or Derivative Works thereof, that is intentionally
submitted to Licensor for inclusion in the Work by the copyright
owner
or by an individual or Legal Entity authorized to submit on
behalf of
the copyright owner. For the purposes of this definition,
"submitted"
means any form of electronic, verbal, or written communication
sent
to the Licensor or its representatives, including but not limited
to
communication on electronic mailing lists, source code control
systems,
and issue tracking systems that are managed by, or on behalf of,
the
Licensor for the purpose of discussing and improving the Work, but
excluding communication that is conspicuously marked or otherwise
designated in writing by the copyright owner as "Not a
Contribution."
"Contributor" shall mean Licensor and any individual or Legal
Entity
on behalf of whom a Contribution has been received by Licensor and
subsequently incorporated within the Work.
2. Grant of Copyright License. Subject to the terms and conditions of
this License, each Contributor hereby grants to You a perpetual,
worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable
copyright license to reproduce, prepare Derivative Works of,
publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, and distribute the
Work and such Derivative Works in Source or Object form.
3. Grant of Patent License. Subject to the terms and conditions of
this License, each Contributor hereby grants to You a perpetual,
worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable
(except as stated in this section) patent license to make, have
made,
use, offer to sell, sell, import, and otherwise transfer the Work,
where such license applies only to those patent claims licensable
by such Contributor that are necessarily infringed by their
Contribution(s) alone or by combination of their Contribution(s)
with the Work to which such Contribution(s) was submitted. If You
institute patent litigation against any entity (including a
cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit) alleging that the Work
or a Contribution incorporated within the Work constitutes direct
or contributory patent infringement, then any patent licenses
granted to You under this License for that Work shall terminate
as of the date such litigation is filed.
4. Redistribution. You may reproduce and distribute copies of the
Work or Derivative Works thereof in any medium, with or without
modifications, and in Source or Object form, provided that You
meet the following conditions:
(a) You must give any other recipients of the Work or
Derivative Works a copy of this License; and
(b) You must cause any modified files to carry prominent notices
stating that You changed the files; and
(c) You must retain, in the Source form of any Derivative Works
that You distribute, all copyright, patent, trademark, and
attribution notices from the Source form of the Work,
excluding those notices that do not pertain to any part of
the Derivative Works; and
(d) If the Work includes a "NOTICE" text file as part of its
distribution, then any Derivative Works that You distribute
must
include a readable copy of the attribution notices contained
within such NOTICE file, excluding those notices that do not
pertain to any part of the Derivative Works, in at least one
of the following places: within a NOTICE text file distributed
as part of the Derivative Works; within the Source form or
documentation, if provided along with the Derivative Works;
or,
within a display generated by the Derivative Works, if and
wherever such third-party notices normally appear. The
contents
of the NOTICE file are for informational purposes only and
do not modify the License. You may add Your own attribution
notices within Derivative Works that You distribute, alongside
or as an addendum to the NOTICE text from the Work, provided
that such additional attribution notices cannot be construed
as modifying the License.
You may add Your own copyright statement to Your modifications and
may provide additional or different license terms and conditions
for use, reproduction, or distribution of Your modifications, or
for any such Derivative Works as a whole, provided Your use,
reproduction, and distribution of the Work otherwise complies with
the conditions stated in this License.
5. Submission of Contributions. Unless You explicitly state
otherwise,
any Contribution intentionally submitted for inclusion in the Work
by You to the Licensor shall be under the terms and conditions of
this License, without any additional terms or conditions.
Notwithstanding the above, nothing herein shall supersede or
modify
the terms of any separate license agreement you may have executed
with Licensor regarding such Contributions. You should not submit
as a "Contribution" any work that is not Your original creation.
6. Trademarks. This License does not grant permission to use the
trade
names, trademarks, service marks, or product names of the
Licensor,
except as required for reasonable and customary use in describing
the
origin of the Work and reproducing the content of the NOTICE file.
7. Disclaimer of Warranty. Unless required by applicable law or
agreed to in writing, Licensor provides the Work (and each
Contributor provides its Contributions) on an "AS IS" BASIS,
WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or
implied, including, without limitation, any warranties or
conditions
of TITLE, NON-INFRINGEMENT, MERCHANTABILITY, or FITNESS FOR A
PARTICULAR PURPOSE. You are solely responsible for determining the
appropriateness of using or redistributing the Work and assume any
risks associated with Your exercise of permissions under this
License.
8. Limitation of Liability. In no event and under no legal theory,
whether in tort (including negligence), contract, or otherwise,
unless required by applicable law (such as deliberate and grossly
negligent acts) or agreed to in writing, shall any Contributor be
liable to You for damages, including any direct, indirect,
special,
incidental, or consequential damages of any character arising as a
result of this License or out of the use or inability to use the
Work (including but not limited to damages for loss of goodwill,
work stoppage, computer failure or malfunction, or any and all
other commercial damages or losses), even if such Contributor
has been advised of the possibility of such damages.
9. Accepting Warranty or Additional Liability. While redistributing
the Work or Derivative Works thereof, You may choose to offer,
and charge a fee for, acceptance of support, warranty, indemnity,
or other liability obligations and/or rights consistent with this
License. However, in accepting such obligations, You may act only
on Your own behalf and on Your sole responsibility, not on behalf
of any other Contributor, and only if You agree to indemnify,
defend, and hold each Contributor harmless for any liability
incurred by, or claims asserted against, such Contributor by
reason
of your accepting any such warranty or additional liability.
END OF TERMS AND CONDITIONS
APPENDIX: How to apply the Apache License to your work.
To apply the Apache License to your work, attach the following
boilerplate notice, with the fields enclosed by brackets "[]"
replaced with your own identifying information. (Don't include
the brackets!) The text should be enclosed in the appropriate
comment syntax for the file format. We also recommend that a
file or class name and description of purpose be included on the
same "printed page" as the copyright notice for easier
identification within third-party archives.
Copyright (C) [yyyy] [name of copyright owner]
Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
You may obtain a copy of the License at
http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or
implied.
See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
limitations under the License.
====================================================================
== Sample NOTICE file, in this case for Apache httpd-2.0 ==
====================================================================
This product includes software developed by
The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).
Portions of this software were developed at the National Center
for Supercomputing Applications (NCSA) at the University of
Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
This software contains code derived from the RSA Data Security
Inc. MD5 Message-Digest Algorithm, including various
modifications by Spyglass Inc., Carnegie Mellon University, and
Bell Communications Research, Inc (Bellcore).
Regular expression support is provided by the PCRE library package,
which is open source software, written by Philip Hazel, and copyright
by the University of Cambridge, England. The original software is
available from
ftp://ftp.csx.cam.ac.uk/pub/software/programming/pcre/
Re: Review of proposed Apache License, version 2.0
Posted by Don Armstrong <do...@donarmstrong.com>.
On Fri, 09 Jan 2004, Brian Behlendorf wrote:
> Eben reviewed a draft of the 2.0 license on November 14th,
> Message-ID: <16...@new.law.columbia.edu>, I can
> send you a copy or you can find it in the archive here:
Yes, that was the revision where the patent reciprocity clause was in
§5 (now §3, assuming I remember correctly). At that time, he noted
that §5 was in conflict with the GPL.
> In doing so I believe we addressed the two issues that affected GPL
> compliance, but I asked Eben earlier this week if he could take one
> last look at the current 2.0 draft.
I definetly think the current draft is closer to GPL compatibility
than the draft as of November 14th, but I'm still of the opinion that
ASL §3 conflicts with GPL §7. Hopefully Eben will be able to either
put my concerns to rest, or clarify the nature of the conflict if it
actually exists.
Don Armstrong
--
Personally, I think my choice in the mostest-superlative-computer wars
has to be the HP-48 series of calculators. They'll run almost
anything. And if they can't, while I'll just plug a Linux box into
the serial port and load up the HP-48 VT-100 emulator.
-- Jeff Dege, jdege@winternet.com
http://www.donarmstrong.com
http://www.anylevel.com
http://rzlab.ucr.edu
RE: Review of proposed Apache License, version 2.0
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
Brian Behlendorf wrote:
> Eben reviewed a draft of the 2.0 license on November 14th, Message-ID:
> <16...@new.law.columbia.edu>, I can send you a
> copy or you can find it in the archive here:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/eyebrowse/ReadMsg?listName=license@apache.or
g&msgNo=69
--- Noel
Re: Review of proposed Apache License, version 2.0
Posted by Brian Behlendorf <br...@collab.net>.
On Wed, 7 Jan 2004, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Wed, 07 Jan 2004, Brian Behlendorf wrote:
> > Since I believe this license is compatible with the GPL,
>
> The second half of section 3 is quite likely not compatible with the
> GPL, as it imposes a further restriction upon redistribution that is
> not present in the GPL itself. [From my reading, it conflicts directly
> with the language of section 7 of the GPL.]
Eben reviewed a draft of the 2.0 license on November 14th, Message-ID:
<16...@new.law.columbia.edu>, I can send you a copy or
you can find it in the archive here:
http://www.apache.org/mail/license/200311.gz
He did make a comment about the patent language, asking that we narrow the
scope of the termination from applying to actions taken against any
software, to the Work itself, and we agreed that this was a good
suggestion and made the change. We also incorporated his other
suggestion from that email. In doing so I believe we addressed the two
issues that affected GPL compliance, but I asked Eben earlier this week if
he could take one last look at the current 2.0 draft.
Brian
Re: Review of proposed Apache License, version 2.0
Posted by Don Armstrong <do...@donarmstrong.com>.
On Wed, 07 Jan 2004, Brian Behlendorf wrote:
> Since I believe this license is compatible with the GPL,
The second half of section 3 is quite likely not compatible with the
GPL, as it imposes a further restriction upon redistribution that is
not present in the GPL itself. [From my reading, it conflicts directly
with the language of section 7 of the GPL.]
I'm not aware if compatibility with the GPL is a necesary quality for
the ASL to have, but if it is, it seemingly does not have it.
Perhaps Eben Moglen [Cc:'d in case he is not subscribed] would be
willing to make a more in depth commentary upon this?
Don Armstrong
--
Unix, MS-DOS, and Windows NT (also known as the Good, the Bad, and
the Ugly).
-- Matt Welsh
http://www.donarmstrong.com
http://www.anylevel.com
http://rzlab.ucr.edu
Re: Review of proposed Apache License, version 2.0
Posted by David Crossley <cr...@apache.org>.
Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> > I would like to support all this. Whitespace is not a minor issue.
> > Inconsistencies wreak havoc on CVS diffs. It seems that some
> > text editors try to correct these inconsistencies (e.g. to change
> > any 3-space indentation back to 2-space indentation) which results
> > in an unnecessary and confusing diff.
> >
> > * The main license has 2-space indentation which is great. However
> > some lines have an odd number of spaces, e.g. the first line here
> > incorrectly has 3 spaces while the second line correctly has 6 spaces.
>
> The entire license has 3-space indentation, except where indentation
> is being used to show hierarchy. My editor does not suffer from the
> problem you describe and I do not expect anyone else to be editing
> the license text (at least not with a broken editor).
The reason for my comments about inconsistent whitespace is that
we have seen big troubles in CVS with the license header at the
top of *.java files etc. Some people have text editors that have
capabilities to automatically "correct" whitespace and this causes
mangled diffs.
--David
Re: Review of proposed Apache License, version 2.0
Posted by "Roy T. Fielding" <fi...@apache.org>.
> I would like to support all this. Whitespace is not a minor issue.
> Inconsistencies wreak havoc on CVS diffs. It seems that some
> text editors try to correct these inconsistencies (e.g. to change
> any 3-space indentation back to 2-space indentation) which results
> in an unnecessary and confusing diff.
>
> * The main license has 2-space indentation which is great. However
> some lines have an odd number of spaces, e.g. the first line here
> incorrectly has 3 spaces while the second line correctly has 6 spaces.
The entire license has 3-space indentation, except where indentation
is being used to show hierarchy. My editor does not suffer from the
problem you describe and I do not expect anyone else to be editing
the license text (at least not with a broken editor).
....Roy
Re: Review of proposed Apache License, version 2.0
Posted by David Crossley <cr...@apache.org>.
Dave Hodder wrote:
>
> A very minor comment: I think the paragraphs need to be rejustified
> before the final release. (Some of the lines in Section 1 are 77
> columns wide where as the first line of Section 7 is wrapping at less
> than 73 columns.)
<snip/>
> The following diff may or may not be of use; it mostly relates to the
> Appendix and (i) removes what I believe is a superfluous space; (ii)
> rejustifies the template to 71 columns and (iii) removes a few empty
> newlines from the very bottom of the file:
I would like to support all this. Whitespace is not a minor issue.
Inconsistencies wreak havoc on CVS diffs. It seems that some
text editors try to correct these inconsistencies (e.g. to change
any 3-space indentation back to 2-space indentation) which results
in an unnecessary and confusing diff.
* The main license has 2-space indentation which is great. However
some lines have an odd number of spaces, e.g. the first line here
incorrectly has 3 spaces while the second line correctly has 6 spaces.
------
3. Grant of Patent License. Subject to the terms and conditions of
this License, each Contributor hereby grants to You a perpetual,
------
* The example "copyright" line has one double-space in the middle
of the text.
* The NOTICEs sections incorrectly have 3-space indentation.
* Some other licenses (e.g. cla.txt) have 3-space indentation
rather than 2-space.
* I checked some licences for trailing spaces at end-of-lines
and they seemed fine, but i did not check all licenses.
--David
Re: Review of proposed Apache License, version 2.0
Posted by "Roy T. Fielding" <fi...@gbiv.com>.
> A very minor comment: I think the paragraphs need to be rejustified
> before the final release. (Some of the lines in Section 1 are 77
> columns wide where as the first line of Section 7 is wrapping at less
> than 73 columns.)
They were manually justified in order to make them easier to read,
depending more on the length and substance of the paragraph rather
than a mechanical column number.
The nominal indentation is three spaces on both margins and the
numbering
is presented as if it were an outline, again for ease of reading.
That is simply a personal preference of mine.
> I notice the sample NOTICE file has differing justification between
> notices too, and that the Apache acknowledgement changes from
>
> This product includes software developed by the
> Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).
>
> in Apache Software License v1.1 to
>
> This product includes software developed by
> The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).
> ^
> in Apache License v2.0. (Note the word "the" has changed to start with
> an upper case letter.)
The legal name of the foundation is "The Apache Software Foundation".
....Roy
Re: Review of proposed Apache License, version 2.0
Posted by Dave Hodder <dm...@dmh.org.uk>.
Hello,
A very minor comment: I think the paragraphs need to be rejustified
before the final release. (Some of the lines in Section 1 are 77
columns wide where as the first line of Section 7 is wrapping at less
than 73 columns.)
I notice the sample NOTICE file has differing justification between
notices too, and that the Apache acknowledgement changes from
This product includes software developed by the
Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).
in Apache Software License v1.1 to
This product includes software developed by
The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).
^
in Apache License v2.0. (Note the word "the" has changed to start with
an upper case letter.)
The following diff may or may not be of use; it mostly relates to the
Appendix and (i) removes what I believe is a superfluous space; (ii)
rejustifies the template to 71 columns and (iii) removes a few empty
newlines from the very bottom of the file:
--- LICENSE-2.0.txt 2004-01-14 21:21:36.000000000 +0000
+++ LICENSE-dmh.txt 2004-01-14 21:50:02.000000000 +0000
@@ -192,7 +192,7 @@
To apply the Apache License to your work, attach the following
boilerplate notice, with the fields enclosed by brackets "[]"
replaced with your own identifying information. (Don't include
- the brackets!) The text should be enclosed in the appropriate
+ the brackets!) The text should be enclosed in the appropriate
comment syntax for the file format. We also recommend that a
file or class name and description of purpose be included on the
same "printed page" as the copyright notice for easier
@@ -200,17 +200,17 @@
Copyright [yyyy] [name of copyright owner]
- Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
- you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
- You may obtain a copy of the License at
+ Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License"); you
+ may not use this file except in compliance with the License. You may
+ obtain a copy of the License at
http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
- WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
- See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
- limitations under the License.
+ WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or
+ implied. See the License for the specific language governing
+ permissions and limitations under the License.
====================================================================
== Sample NOTICE file, in this case for Apache httpd-2.0 ==
@@ -232,5 +232,4 @@
which is open source software, written by Philip Hazel, and copyright
by the University of Cambridge, England. The original software is
available from
- ftp://ftp.csx.cam.ac.uk/pub/software/programming/pcre/
-
+ ftp://ftp.csx.cam.ac.uk/pub/software/programming/pcre/
\ No newline at end of file
Re: Review of proposed Apache License, version 2.0
Posted by "Roy T. Fielding" <fi...@apache.org>.
> The suggested change has been applied to make rev 1.24, along with
> an update of the month to January 2004. There are no other changes.
Of course, I remembered another change needed just after sending that
message, though it isn't to the license text itself. The template for
giving the copyright line has been changed (rev 1.25) to remove the
use of "(C)" after the word Copyright, since only the word itself or the
real circled-c symbol are valid under international law.
....Roy
Re: Review of proposed Apache License, version 2.0
Posted by "Roy T. Fielding" <fi...@apache.org>.
The suggested change has been applied to make rev 1.24, along with
an update of the month to January 2004. There are no other changes.
diff -u -r1.23 -r1.24
--- LICENSE-2.0.txt 24 Dec 2003 12:06:34 -0000 1.23
+++ LICENSE-2.0.txt 14 Jan 2004 20:18:32 -0000 1.24
@@ -11,7 +11,7 @@
====================================+===================================
=
Apache License
- Version 2.0, December 2003
+ Version 2.0, January 2004
http://www.apache.org/licenses/
TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR USE, REPRODUCTION, AND DISTRIBUTION
@@ -57,7 +57,7 @@
separable from, or merely link (or bind by name) to the
interfaces of,
the Work and Derivative Works thereof.
- "Contribution" shall mean any original work of authorship,
including
+ "Contribution" shall mean any work of authorship, including
the original version of the Work and any modifications or
additions
to that Work or Derivative Works thereof, that is intentionally
submitted to Licensor for inclusion in the Work by the copyright
owner
@@ -145,8 +145,7 @@
this License, without any additional terms or conditions.
Notwithstanding the above, nothing herein shall supersede or
modify
the terms of any separate license agreement you may have executed
- with Licensor regarding such Contributions. You should not submit
- as a "Contribution" any work that is not Your original creation.
+ with Licensor regarding such Contributions.
....Roy
Re: Review of proposed Apache License, version 2.0
Posted by Brian Behlendorf <br...@collab.net>.
On Wed, 24 Dec 2003, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> Thank you all for your comments on the proposed license. I have
> incorporated as much of the changes as possible and posted a new
> version on the site
>
> http://www.apache.org/licenses/proposed/
This is *almost* perfect. I'm worried about the definition of
"Contribution" and section 5, as it pertains to someone making a
Contribution that is actually someone else's "original work", but which
carries a license that allows the code to be contributed. I propose the
following diff, leaving paragraph justification to a later change for
clarity, and removing what seems like a redundant statement in section 5,
since "should" would never be accurate anyways - either you must not, or
there are certain conditions under which you may. And it has the nice
side-effect of stripping out 16 more words. :)
Index: LICENSE-2.0.txt
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvs/site/docs/licenses/proposed/LICENSE-2.0.txt,v
retrieving revision 1.23
diff -r1.23 LICENSE-2.0.txt
60c60
< "Contribution" shall mean any original work of authorship,
including
---
> "Contribution" shall mean any work of authorship, including
148,149c148
< with Licensor regarding such Contributions. You should not submit
< as a "Contribution" any work that is not Your original creation.
---
> with Licensor regarding such Contributions.
Since I believe this license is compatible with the GPL, and I believe we
have hashed this out quite a bit and addressed the best possible position
between a number of proposed alternatives, I am prepared (whether or not
my change is adopted) to make a proposal to the board to officially
endorse these new licenses at the next Board meeting, which is January
21st. That will bring this very long process to a close. Speak up now,
with clear and as-concise-as-possible proposed last-minute changes.
Brian
Re: Review of proposed Apache License, version 2.0
Posted by Jason Wies <ja...@xc.net>.
There is still one area that needs clarification.
On Wed, Dec 24, 2003 at 04:16:06AM -0800, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> 1. Definitions.
> "Contribution" shall mean any ___original___ work of
> authorship, including the original version of the Work and any
> modifications or additions to that Work or Derivative Works thereof,
> that is intentionally submitted to Licensor for inclusion in the Work
> by the copyright owner ___or by an individual or Legal Entity
> authorized to submit on behalf of the copyright owner___.
> 5. Submission of Contributions. Unless You explicitly state
> otherwise, any Contribution intentionally submitted for
> inclusion in the Work by You to the Licensor shall be under the terms
> and conditions of this License, without any additional terms or
> conditions. Notwithstanding the above, nothing herein shall supersede
> or modify the terms of any separate license agreement you may have
> executed with Licensor regarding such Contributions. ___You should not
> submit as a "Contribution" any work that is not Your original
> creation___.
By stating "original" work you most likely are trying to avoid
submissions of strictly licensed code that can't be legally used. I
think that case is covered by rest of that section, and certainly
submissions of code not written recently or not written with Apache in
mind are still welcome (e.g. compression algorithms, fast lookup code,
etc.). "Original work" seems to exclude those contributions, if not
legally then in spirit.
And the last sentence of section 5 doesn't match up with the
definition of Contribution. Submitting good code that doesn't happen
to be your original creation should be encouraged, so long as the
authorization to submit in section 1 is obtained or permitted by
license.
Jason