You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to legal-discuss@apache.org by Marshall Schor <ms...@schor.com> on 2012/01/18 05:21:21 UTC
Augmenting License/Notice files when distributing binary modules
One of our binary release packages includes a built version of Apache APR as a
library, as a .so file (on linux, for example). Does including this mean that
(1) we need to augment whatever our LICENSE and NOTICE files are, with what
Apache APR binary packages have for License / Notice files (unless we can verify
our "build" is excluding whatever the particular License/Notice clause applies to)?
Or,
(2) is it sufficient to state in a README that we build and distribute
particular levels of these Apache projects (for example, APR), and depend on
users to discover the licenses / notices that go with those? I don't think the
LICENSE and NOTICE filesa are a part of the binary APR artifact (the .so file) -
at least I didn't know how to find them, and couldn't see them.
I know that
http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#required-third-party-notices gives
some guidance, and in this case it seems the LICENSE file should be augmented,
as well as the NOTICE (because in a binary (not source) release, the artifact
(the .so file) doesn't seem to have the NOTICE information in a handy spot.
I think the answer is (1), but I'm no expert (which is why I'm asking).
-Marshall Schor
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org