You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to legal-discuss@apache.org by "Craig L Russell (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2018/11/01 05:16:00 UTC
[jira] [Comment Edited] (LEGAL-420) Software Grant vs. iCLA / CCLA
for code donations
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-420?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16670791#comment-16670791 ]
Craig L Russell edited comment on LEGAL-420 at 11/1/18 5:15 AM:
----------------------------------------------------------------
[~bdelacretaz]
The problem with your proposal is that the first sentence is incorrect unless you then read the second sentence. So it's confusing.
{quote}IANAL but I don't see how a Corporate CLA would cover (for example) code that's been written for a long period of time at Company X and is now being donated.
{quote}
The CCLA has two parts: a list of "covered" employees and a description of granted software. The two parts are completely separate.
{quote}The Corporate CLA says that Company X allows listed employees to contribute to Apache projects but the set of covered employees can be very different from the set of people who worked on the donated software.
{quote}
The grant covers the software even if none of the named employees had anything to do with the creation of the software.
was (Author: clr):
[~bdelacretaz]
The problem with your proposal is that the first sentence is incorrect unless you then read the second sentence. So it's confusing.
{quote}IANAL but I don't see how a Corporate CLA would cover (for example) code that's been written for a long period of time at Company X and is now being donated.
{quote}
The CCLA has two parts: a list of "covered" employees and a description of granted software. The two parts are completely separate.
{quote}The Corporate CLA says that Company X allows listed employees to contribute to Apache projects but the set of covered employees can be very different from the set of people who worked on the donated software.
{quote}
The grant covers the software even though none of the named employees had anything to do with the creation of the software.
> Software Grant vs. iCLA / CCLA for code donations
> -------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LEGAL-420
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-420
> Project: Legal Discuss
> Issue Type: Question
> Reporter: Bertrand Delacretaz
> Priority: Major
>
> The IP clearance template at [1] says:
> {quote}Either an Individual CLA or Corporate CLA is preferred to a Software Grant. All owners of IP must sign one of the three documents and send to secretary
> {quote}
> To me it's unclear whether we can omit the requirement for a Software Grant when incoming software clearly appears to belong to a corporation, being hosted for example at github.com/<corporation name>
> Are iCLAs from all authors of the incoming software sufficient in such a case?
> The "all owners of IP must sign" statement quoted above makes me unsure.
> We have a concrete case at INCUBATOR-222, a donation where all contributors to the incoming code have an iCLA on file, but which clearly comes from IBM.
> [1] [http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/content/ip-clearance/ip-clearance-template.xml]
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org