You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@lucene.apache.org by "david.w.smiley@gmail.com" <da...@gmail.com> on 2016/03/01 22:19:04 UTC
Copyrights
I'm considering doing some enhancements to Lucene/Solr on behalf of another
organization/entity who wants me to include copyright statements to them.
Same ASLv2 license. This is no big deal; right? I see we've already got
some source files with non-ASF copyright licenses (e.g. Automata.java and
others), and I see we have NOTICE files referencing it too. I also see
some special support in common-build.xml to detect it.
~ David
--
Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker
LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book:
http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com
Re: Copyrights
Posted by "david.w.smiley@gmail.com" <da...@gmail.com>.
I'll send a note to that Apache list; thanks for the reference.
On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 4:49 PM Mike Drob <md...@apache.org> wrote:
> I would check with legal-discuss@a.o to be sure, but here is my
> understanding of relevant ASF policies:
>
> All work done and contributed by an individual is bound by the terms of
> your ICLA. You retain the copyright ownership under ASLv2, but have granted
> the ASF (an irrevocable?) permission and license to use your work.
>
> If the work is copyright assigned to a different organization, then I
> believe it has to be brought in as a 3rd party work. It can retain the
> original headers, as long as the terms as compatible, and needs to be
> called out in NOTICE file like you alluded to.
>
> Dev-for-hire work happens pretty regularly in today's world; I don't think
> anybody is under the illusion that Lucene is built solely by a group of
> hobbyists. CCLAs cover most of the cases where the funding organization is
> willing to forgo copyright ownership, but that doesn't sound like the case
> here.
>
> I'm not sure what happens if a different person comes in later and finds a
> bug and makes changes to those files. Presumably we're fine, but some
> people might feel a little strange assigning copyright back to a unknown
> company instead of licensing use to the ASF.
>
> Mike
>
> On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 3:19 PM, david.w.smiley@gmail.com <
> david.w.smiley@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm considering doing some enhancements to Lucene/Solr on behalf of
>> another organization/entity who wants me to include copyright statements to
>> them. Same ASLv2 license. This is no big deal; right? I see we've
>> already got some source files with non-ASF copyright licenses (e.g.
>> Automata.java and others), and I see we have NOTICE files referencing it
>> too. I also see some special support in common-build.xml to detect it.
>>
>> ~ David
>> --
>> Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker
>> LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book:
>> http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com
>>
>
> --
Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker
LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book:
http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com
Re: Copyrights
Posted by Mike Drob <md...@apache.org>.
I would check with legal-discuss@a.o to be sure, but here is my
understanding of relevant ASF policies:
All work done and contributed by an individual is bound by the terms of
your ICLA. You retain the copyright ownership under ASLv2, but have granted
the ASF (an irrevocable?) permission and license to use your work.
If the work is copyright assigned to a different organization, then I
believe it has to be brought in as a 3rd party work. It can retain the
original headers, as long as the terms as compatible, and needs to be
called out in NOTICE file like you alluded to.
Dev-for-hire work happens pretty regularly in today's world; I don't think
anybody is under the illusion that Lucene is built solely by a group of
hobbyists. CCLAs cover most of the cases where the funding organization is
willing to forgo copyright ownership, but that doesn't sound like the case
here.
I'm not sure what happens if a different person comes in later and finds a
bug and makes changes to those files. Presumably we're fine, but some
people might feel a little strange assigning copyright back to a unknown
company instead of licensing use to the ASF.
Mike
On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 3:19 PM, david.w.smiley@gmail.com <
david.w.smiley@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm considering doing some enhancements to Lucene/Solr on behalf of
> another organization/entity who wants me to include copyright statements to
> them. Same ASLv2 license. This is no big deal; right? I see we've
> already got some source files with non-ASF copyright licenses (e.g.
> Automata.java and others), and I see we have NOTICE files referencing it
> too. I also see some special support in common-build.xml to detect it.
>
> ~ David
> --
> Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker
> LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book:
> http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com
>
Re: Copyrights
Posted by Mark Miller <ma...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 1:24 PM david.w.smiley@gmail.com <
david.w.smiley@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm considering doing some enhancements to Lucene/Solr on behalf of
> another organization/entity who wants me to include copyright statements to
> them. Same ASLv2 license. This is no big deal; right? I see we've
> already got some source files with non-ASF copyright licenses (e.g.
> Automata.java and others), and I see we have NOTICE files referencing it
> too. I also see some special support in common-build.xml to detect it.
>
>
>
http://apache.org/legal/src-headers.html
I would say this comes under works submitted directly by the copyright
owner or the owner's agent, and we don't want any copyright notices in it.
1. This section refers only to works submitted directly to the ASF by
the copyright owner or owner's agent.
2.
If the source file is submitted with a copyright notice included in it,
the copyright owner (or owner's agent) must either:
1. remove such notices, or
2. move them to the NOTICE file associated with each applicable
project release, or
3. provide written permission for the ASF to make such removal or
relocation of the notices.
TREATMENT OF THIRD-PARTY WORKS
The term "third-party work" refers to a work not submitted directly to the
ASF by the copyright owner or owner's agent.
--
- Mark
about.me/markrmiller