Compatibility OFL and Apache License 2

[Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org>]

For the runtime monitor, we use FontAwsome, which is Licensed under the
Open Font License.

The License is very permissive, but states that in the distribution, the
set of font files itself will remain under OFL.

It also has a clause about restricted names: If the Author marks the Font
Name as restricted, then any modifications of the Font Files must be
assigned a different name.

Does that void compatibility with the ASL?

Has anybody experience with that?

Stephan

Re: Compatibility OFL and Apache License 2

[Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org>]

You are right, that is solved :-)
I must have missed that entry.

Great, I'll add the label top the license file.

Re: Compatibility OFL and Apache License 2

[Robert Metzger <rm...@apache.org>]

Hi,

it seems that Apache Ambari is also shipping Font Awesome:
https://github.com/apache/ambari/blob/trunk/ambari-web/app/assets/licenses/NOTICE.txt
They state that it has the Creative Commons license. But I agree with you,
the website says it is OFL licensed.

But the website that lists all cleared licenses has OFL as category B:
http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-b
See also https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-112

So from my point of view, everything is okay with this license.

Robert


On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 5:40 PM, Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org> wrote:

> For the runtime monitor, we use FontAwsome, which is Licensed under the
> Open Font License.
>
> The License is very permissive, but states that in the distribution, the
> set of font files itself will remain under OFL.
>
> It also has a clause about restricted names: If the Author marks the Font
> Name as restricted, then any modifications of the Font Files must be
> assigned a different name.
>
> Does that void compatibility with the ASL?
>
> Has anybody experience with that?
>
> Stephan
>