You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to legal-discuss@apache.org by Simon Kitching <sk...@apache.org> on 2005/07/26 13:50:13 UTC

Dual licensing of code

Hi All,

In the last couple of months I wrote two classes to assist in
unit-testing of jakarta commons logging. These classes have been
committed to the commons-logging subversion with an Apache copyright
and the standard APL 2.0 attached.

I am now looking at writing an article about unit testing and would like
to be able to provide these classes as code in the public domain, just
to make it as easy as possible for readers of the article to reuse that
code.

Is there any issue with doing this? What is the exact procedure I should
follow? Should I add something like
  "This code is also in the public domain."
following the Apache license header or somesuch? I presume I can't just
delete the apache license header and replace it with such a declaration
- and I don't really want to; I just want readers of the article to be
able to reuse these two simple classes without any constraints at all,
including the requirement to acknowledge Apache code is present.

Note that the classes are 100% my own work as can be seen from the
subversion history. The actual classes in question are
  PathableTestSuite.java
  PathableClassLoader.java
which can be seen here:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jakarta/commons/proper/logging/trunk/src/test/org/apache/commons/logging/
or here:
http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/jakarta/commons/proper/logging/trunk/src/test/org/apache/commons/logging/

Thanks,

Simon


---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only, are not privileged and do not constitute legal advice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org


Re: Dual licensing of code

Posted by Henri Yandell <ba...@apache.org>.

On Tue, 26 Jul 2005, Simon Kitching wrote:

> Hi All,

Sorry for not replying on general@jakarta, I'll say what I was going to 
say there here so experts can laugh and point out how horribly wrong it 
all is.

> I am now looking at writing an article about unit testing and would like
> to be able to provide these classes as code in the public domain, just
> to make it as easy as possible for readers of the article to reuse that
> code.
>
> Is there any issue with doing this? What is the exact procedure I should
> follow? Should I add something like
>  "This code is also in the public domain."

There are effectively two versions of the code, the ASF copyrighted 
version that lives on svn.apache.org and the Simon Kitching copyrighted 
version that lives wherever.

You are public domaining the Simon Kitching version, which has no ASL 
licence at the top and no impact on the ASF copyrighted version.

One slight nitpick is that you've probably not got your own copy, so I 
imagine you silently roll the ASF copyrighted version (which is all Simon 
Kitching work) into a Simon Kitching version. Technically wrong, but I 
imagine a reality that no one would fuss over (?).

> following the Apache license header or somesuch? I presume I can't just
> delete the apache license header and replace it with such a declaration
> - and I don't really want to; I just want readers of the article to be
> able to reuse these two simple classes without any constraints at all,
> including the requirement to acknowledge Apache code is present.

I thought there were negatives to public-domain, ie) you're not protected 
at all?

Also, I suspect that you can't dual-license (as such) between a licence 
and public domain as public domain is the lack of a licence(?).

I'd drop the ASL licence to get the Simon Kitching version, then BSD 
licence it, dropping the acknowledgement clause. Only worry would be over 
the impropriety of the first step.

Hen

---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only, are not privileged and do not constitute legal advice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org


Re: Dual licensing of code

Posted by Jeffrey Thompson <jt...@us.ibm.com>.
Simon Kitching <sk...@apache.org> wrote on 07/26/2005 07:50:13 AM:

> Hi All,
> 
> In the last couple of months I wrote two classes to assist in
> unit-testing of jakarta commons logging. These classes have been
> committed to the commons-logging subversion with an Apache copyright
> and the standard APL 2.0 attached.
> 
> I am now looking at writing an article about unit testing and would like
> to be able to provide these classes as code in the public domain, just
> to make it as easy as possible for readers of the article to reuse that
> code.
> 
> Is there any issue with doing this? What is the exact procedure I should
> follow? Should I add something like
>   "This code is also in the public domain."
> following the Apache license header or somesuch? I presume I can't just
> delete the apache license header and replace it with such a declaration
> - and I don't really want to; I just want readers of the article to be
> able to reuse these two simple classes without any constraints at all,
> including the requirement to acknowledge Apache code is present.

As mentioned elsewhere, public domain isn't a license, it is the state of 
a work of authorship after which all copyright rights have been 
extinguished.  That is, once something has been placed in the public 
domain, there is nothing left to license.  Placing something in the public 
domain and distributing it under the Apache license are mutually 
inconsistent.
> 
> Note that the classes are 100% my own work as can be seen from the
> subversion history. The actual classes in question are
>   PathableTestSuite.java
>   PathableClassLoader.java
> which can be seen here:
> http://svn.apache.
> 
org/repos/asf/jakarta/commons/proper/logging/trunk/src/test/org/apache/commons/logging/
> or here:
> http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs.
> 
cgi/jakarta/commons/proper/logging/trunk/src/test/org/apache/commons/logging/

It's normally recommended that an author keep copies of anything he 
contributes, so that he won't have to pull a copy from Apache's SVN. There 
is a question of proof if you try to dedicate something out of Apache's 
SVN to the public domain.  Can you really PROVE that no other material has 
been added to that code by someone else?  Logs are useful, but are they 
PROOF?

Putting aside that question, you certainly can dedicate your code to the 
public domain.  You own it and I don't see anything in the CLA or the 
Apache license that would prevent it.  The effect on Apache will be 
interesting.  The rights that they are licensing to their customers 
disappear, at least for those lines of code.  It probably won't have any 
practical effect though because the remainder of the project is 
unaffected.

The problems usually voiced about dedicating code to the public domain is 
that the process which satisfies one jursidiction might not satisfy 
others.  In most jurisdictions the process is not well defined, so you 
would need to consult local experts in all relevant jurisdictions to make 
sure that you've followed all of the required steps.  Most people when 
they think hard about it decide to just license the code under a very 
permissive license (such as modified-MIT).
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Simon
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
> only, are not privileged and do not constitute legal advice.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
> 

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/