You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to legal-discuss@apache.org by Henri Yandell <ba...@apache.org> on 2006/01/14 00:11:49 UTC
Obscure licences
More as an FYI for Cliff than anything else, here' a list of obscure
licences currently in use by looking at the jars present in the current
releases of each subproject:
* Tidy - W3C licence? http://jtidy.sourceforge.net/license.html
* htmlparser - LGPL, but we have non-exclusive permission to use under ASL
1.1 licence. Seems fine in spirit, but I don't know what we
need officially, or if it's a problem. Currently the NOTICE
just says:
"The developers of JMeter and Apache are grateful to the developers
of HTMLParser for giving Apache Software Foundation a non-exclusive
license. "
Along with a couple of paragraphs about HTMLParser. I don't think there is
an actual document recording this non-exclusive license on record.
* Rhino - NPL
* Jython - Seems to be a mix of a BSD and a BeOpen/CNRI license:
http://www.jython.org/license.html
* uddi4j - IBM Public License
* 'w3c.jar' - Either a W3C work, or an ASF implementation of a W3C spec.
In addition, one encryption library, http://www.cryptix.org/, whose
license appears to be BSD with one of the indented clauses removed.
Everything else is standard stuff: BSD, MIT, ASL 1.1/2, CPL, and various
BCL jars.
Hen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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: Jython licensing
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@lyra.org>.
The FSF viewed the jurisdiction thing as an "additional requirement",
thus throwing the Python license into the "incompatible camp". That
was part of a specific FSF strategy a while back to declare a bunch of
licenses incompatible with the GPL (there were one or two others
declared incompat at roughly the same time). Needless to say, it
caused a ton of pain for the Python community.
And yah. I'm bitter about it, and that episode is one of the reasons
that I'm not a particular fan of the FSF.
Ah yeah. I recall that... Clause 3's intent is to ensure that
downstream users know what you did to Jython (well, JPython, really).
It can be satisfied by adding (say) a big JYTHON-CHANGES file at the
top level or some such.
Um... I don't think we can include NPL software in any of our
releases. MPL 1.1, yes. NPL? AFAIK, no...
Cheers,
-g
On Tue, Jan 24, 2006 at 08:35:04AM -0500, Henri Yandell wrote:
>
> The clause in the CNRI that jumped out to me is:
>
> "3. In the event Licensee prepares a derivative work that is based on or
> incorporates the Software or any part thereof, and wants to make the
> derivative work available to the public as provided herein, then
> Licensee hereby agrees to indicate in any such work, in a prominently
> visible way, the nature of the modifications made to CNRI's Software."
>
> However I think that's okay as modifications to Jython are licensed under
> BSD, so I'm guessing that clause never gets invoked. Looking at the
> mailing lists, the FSF have problems with the license because it's under
> the jurisdiction of the state of Virginia, but I've not heard of us caring
> about that kind of thing.
>
> Glad to hear that it's generaly fine, so mainly just FYI-ing that we've a
> 3rd party lib in use at the ASF that has an obscure licence that'll need
> special mention post legal policy. Like the Rhino JavaScript library and
> the NPL.
>
> Hen
>
> On Tue, 24 Jan 2006, Greg Stein wrote:
>
> >In spirit, all of the Python licenses are BSD-ish. The variances are
> >due to CNRI's f**king legal staff. Hell, that's why it is Jython
> >rather than JPython (CNRI wouldn't donate the trademark).
> >
> >So I would say two things:
> >
> >1) philosophically and by-intents, we are totally compatible with the
> > Python-2.0 license. I'm unfamiliar with the JPython-1.1 license,
> > but if that is a "copy" of the early Python licenses... then great.
> >2) if somebody wants to spend a week reviewing the licenses for pure
> > compatibility, then feel free (but is that needed?)
> >
> >btw, Python Software Foundation contributor agreements give
> >contributors two options for how they give code to the PSF: under the
> >Apache License, or under the Python-2.0 license (with the AL preferred)
> >
> >Cheers,
> >-g
> >
> >On Tue, Jan 24, 2006 at 12:10:12AM -0500, Henri Yandell wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>On Fri, 13 Jan 2006, Henri Yandell wrote:
> >>
> >>>* Jython - Seems to be a mix of a BSD and a BeOpen/CNRI license:
> >>> http://www.jython.org/license.html
> >>
> >>Just as a followup here, seems Jython's license is a combined one:
> >>
> >> - JPython-1.1 license (cover the original sources)
> >> - Apache license (cover the ORO matcher code)
> >> - Python-2.0 license (cover most of the python modules in Lib)
> >> - BSD license (cover the changes made to JPython-1.1 sources)
> >>
> >>This looks like the question here boils down to whether we can
> >>redistribute jars licensed under the following two opensource.org
> >>licenses:
> >>
> >>http://www.opensource.org/licenses/pythonpl.php
> >>http://www.opensource.org/licenses/PythonSoftFoundation.php
> >>
> >>Any thoughts?
> >>
> >>Hen
> >>
> >>---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>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
> >
> >--
> >Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
> >
> >---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >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
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
--
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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: Jython licensing [Was: Obscure licences]
Posted by Henri Yandell <ba...@apache.org>.
The clause in the CNRI that jumped out to me is:
"3. In the event Licensee prepares a derivative work that is based on or
incorporates the Software or any part thereof, and wants to make the
derivative work available to the public as provided herein, then
Licensee hereby agrees to indicate in any such work, in a prominently
visible way, the nature of the modifications made to CNRI's Software."
However I think that's okay as modifications to Jython are licensed under
BSD, so I'm guessing that clause never gets invoked. Looking at the
mailing lists, the FSF have problems with the license because it's under
the jurisdiction of the state of Virginia, but I've not heard of us caring
about that kind of thing.
Glad to hear that it's generaly fine, so mainly just FYI-ing that we've a
3rd party lib in use at the ASF that has an obscure licence that'll need
special mention post legal policy. Like the Rhino JavaScript library and
the NPL.
Hen
On Tue, 24 Jan 2006, Greg Stein wrote:
> In spirit, all of the Python licenses are BSD-ish. The variances are
> due to CNRI's f**king legal staff. Hell, that's why it is Jython
> rather than JPython (CNRI wouldn't donate the trademark).
>
> So I would say two things:
>
> 1) philosophically and by-intents, we are totally compatible with the
> Python-2.0 license. I'm unfamiliar with the JPython-1.1 license,
> but if that is a "copy" of the early Python licenses... then great.
> 2) if somebody wants to spend a week reviewing the licenses for pure
> compatibility, then feel free (but is that needed?)
>
> btw, Python Software Foundation contributor agreements give
> contributors two options for how they give code to the PSF: under the
> Apache License, or under the Python-2.0 license (with the AL preferred)
>
> Cheers,
> -g
>
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2006 at 12:10:12AM -0500, Henri Yandell wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 13 Jan 2006, Henri Yandell wrote:
>>
>>> * Jython - Seems to be a mix of a BSD and a BeOpen/CNRI license:
>>> http://www.jython.org/license.html
>>
>> Just as a followup here, seems Jython's license is a combined one:
>>
>> - JPython-1.1 license (cover the original sources)
>> - Apache license (cover the ORO matcher code)
>> - Python-2.0 license (cover most of the python modules in Lib)
>> - BSD license (cover the changes made to JPython-1.1 sources)
>>
>> This looks like the question here boils down to whether we can
>> redistribute jars licensed under the following two opensource.org
>> licenses:
>>
>> http://www.opensource.org/licenses/pythonpl.php
>> http://www.opensource.org/licenses/PythonSoftFoundation.php
>>
>> Any thoughts?
>>
>> Hen
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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
>
> --
> Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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: Jython licensing [Was: Obscure licences]
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@lyra.org>.
In spirit, all of the Python licenses are BSD-ish. The variances are
due to CNRI's f**king legal staff. Hell, that's why it is Jython
rather than JPython (CNRI wouldn't donate the trademark).
So I would say two things:
1) philosophically and by-intents, we are totally compatible with the
Python-2.0 license. I'm unfamiliar with the JPython-1.1 license,
but if that is a "copy" of the early Python licenses... then great.
2) if somebody wants to spend a week reviewing the licenses for pure
compatibility, then feel free (but is that needed?)
btw, Python Software Foundation contributor agreements give
contributors two options for how they give code to the PSF: under the
Apache License, or under the Python-2.0 license (with the AL preferred)
Cheers,
-g
On Tue, Jan 24, 2006 at 12:10:12AM -0500, Henri Yandell wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 13 Jan 2006, Henri Yandell wrote:
>
> >* Jython - Seems to be a mix of a BSD and a BeOpen/CNRI license:
> > http://www.jython.org/license.html
>
> Just as a followup here, seems Jython's license is a combined one:
>
> - JPython-1.1 license (cover the original sources)
> - Apache license (cover the ORO matcher code)
> - Python-2.0 license (cover most of the python modules in Lib)
> - BSD license (cover the changes made to JPython-1.1 sources)
>
> This looks like the question here boils down to whether we can
> redistribute jars licensed under the following two opensource.org
> licenses:
>
> http://www.opensource.org/licenses/pythonpl.php
> http://www.opensource.org/licenses/PythonSoftFoundation.php
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> Hen
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
--
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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
Jython licensing [Was: Obscure licences]
Posted by Henri Yandell <ba...@apache.org>.
On Fri, 13 Jan 2006, Henri Yandell wrote:
> * Jython - Seems to be a mix of a BSD and a BeOpen/CNRI license:
> http://www.jython.org/license.html
Just as a followup here, seems Jython's license is a combined one:
- JPython-1.1 license (cover the original sources)
- Apache license (cover the ORO matcher code)
- Python-2.0 license (cover most of the python modules in Lib)
- BSD license (cover the changes made to JPython-1.1 sources)
This looks like the question here boils down to whether we can
redistribute jars licensed under the following two opensource.org
licenses:
http://www.opensource.org/licenses/pythonpl.php
http://www.opensource.org/licenses/PythonSoftFoundation.php
Any thoughts?
Hen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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