Fwd: JSON License and Apache Projects

[Andy Seaborne <an...@apache.org>]

Jena does not use code with the JSON License so this is just FYI.

jsonld-java uses com.fasterxml.jackson

Some organisations treat the "not be used for evil" clause as not 
material; some organisations, Debian and Google, for instance, don't 
allow its use.

https://opensource.org/ does not classify it as an Open Source license.

	Andy

-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: JSON License and Apache Projects
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2016 09:08:30 -0500
From: Jim Jagielski <ji...@apache.org>
Reply-To: legal-discuss@apache.org
To: legal-discuss@apache.org

As some of you may know, recently the JSON License has been
moved to Category X (https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved#category-x).

I understand that this has impacted some projects, especially
those in the midst of doing a release. I also understand that
up until now, really, there has been no real "outcry" over our
usage of it, especially from end-users and other consumers of
our projects which use it.

As compelling as that is, the fact is that the JSON license
itself is not OSI approved and is therefore not, by definition,
an "Open Source license" and, as such, cannot be considered as
one which is acceptable as related to categories.

Therefore, w/ my VP Legal hat on, I am making the following
statements:

   o No new project, sub-project or codebase, which has not
     used JSON licensed jars (or similar), are allowed to use
     them. In other words, if you haven't been using them, you
     aren't allowed to start. It is Cat-X.

   o If you have been using it, and have done so in a *release*,
     AND there has been NO pushback from your community/eco-system,
     you have a temporary exclusion from the Cat-X classification thru
     April 30, 2017. At that point in time, ANY and ALL usage
     of these JSON licensed artifacts are DISALLOWED. You must
     either find a suitably licensed replacement, or do without.
     There will be NO exceptions.

   o Any situation not covered by the above is an implicit
     DISALLOWAL of usage.

Also please note that in the 2nd situation (where a temporary
exclusion has been granted), you MUST ensure that NOTICE explicitly
notifies the end-user that a JSON licensed artifact exists. They
may not be aware of it up to now, and that MUST be addressed.

If there are any questions, please ask on the legal-discuss@a.o
list.

--
Jim Jagielski
VP Legal Affairs