You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to legal-discuss@apache.org by Shane Curcuru <as...@shanecurcuru.org> on 2017/01/06 18:17:57 UTC

Re: JSON license again

This change in policy made the news!

 "7 notable legal developments in open source in 2016"


https://opensource.com/article/17/1/yearbook-7-notable-legal-developments-2016

Jim Jagielski wrote on 11/3/16 11:20 AM:
> Yep.
>> On Nov 3, 2016, at 9:29 AM, Felix Meschberger <fm...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>
>> Does that read \u201eit is CatX\u201c ?
>>
>> Thanks
>> Felix
>>
>>> Am 03.11.2016 um 13:48 schrieb Jim Jagielski <ji...@apache.org>:
>>>
>>> In fact, I will go further: w/ my VP Legal hat on, I say
>>> that the license is NOT CatA and is NOT approved.
>>>
>>>> On Nov 1, 2016, at 8:05 AM, Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> IMO, JSON should be moved. It is not a valid FSF nor OSI
>>>> license. As such, it is not a true "open source" license
>>>> and has no place as CatA.

-- 

- Shane
  https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/resources

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org