You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to legal-discuss@apache.org by Dongjoon Hyun <do...@gmail.com> on 2023/06/06 20:39:56 UTC

A rule for modified code distribution

Hi, All.

I'm a member of Apache Spark PMC and have a legal question about the
following rule. (There is an on-going discussion about this topic in
dev@spark mailing list currently [1].)

https://www.apache.org/foundation/license-faq.html#Name-changes
"MAY I CALL MY MODIFIED CODE 'APACHE'?"

For instance, is it legitimate when a company sells a bigger product
claiming to "include Apache Spark 3.4.0" (a) and to communicate the users
by disguising their internal product like the official Apache Spark 3.4.0
binary (b) in terms of its Spark UI, logs and CLI and the version number.
Of course, it's a modified code from Apache Spark 3.4.0.

(a) A product information
[image: 13.1_includes_Apache_Spark_3.4.0.png]

(b) Their modified code's UI example
[image: Screenshot 2023-06-04 at 9.37.16 PM.png]


Historically and currently, there exist many products powered by Apache
Spark, but they provide a way to distinguish them by using different
version numbers like `3.4.0-xxx`. However, the above example is the most
confusing case because it sounds like claiming to be Apache Spark 3.4.0
itself inside their products.

If this is legitimate, we can stop our dev@spark mailing list thread. Could
you give us some advice for this use case?


Reference
1. https://lists.apache.org/thread/k7gr65wt0fwtldc7hp7bd0vkg1k93rrb (Apache
Spark Dev Mailing List Thread)

Re: A rule for modified code distribution

Posted by Dongjoon Hyun <do...@apache.org>.

Thank you, Justin and Dave.

I'll read it carefully and do follow-up properly.

Dongjoon

On 2023/06/07 01:43:55 Justin Mclean wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> The bigger question might be if the dependancies or other inclusions still comply with the Apache license.
> 
> Kind Regards,
> Justin
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
> 
> 

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org

Re: A rule for modified code distribution

Posted by Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>.

Hi,

The bigger question might be if the dependancies or other inclusions still comply with the Apache license.

Kind Regards,
Justin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org

Re: A rule for modified code distribution

Posted by Dave Fisher <wa...@comcast.net>.

You should probably forward your initial question to the VP, Brand at trademarks@apache.org

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jun 6, 2023, at 6:16 PM, Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Why this is draft it would be good to follow it. [1] In general only minor changes are allowed, removing some things and keeping the name I don’t think would be allowed under this policy.
> 
> Kind Regards,
> Justin
> 
> 
> 1. https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/downstream.html

Re: A rule for modified code distribution

Posted by Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>.

Hi,

Why this is draft it would be good to follow it. [1] In general only minor changes are allowed, removing some things and keeping the name I don’t think would be allowed under this policy.

Kind Regards,
Justin


1. https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/downstream.html