svn commit: r1655374 - /openoffice/ooo-site/trunk/content/why/why_compliance.mdtext

[ro...@apache.org]

Author: robweir
Date: Wed Jan 28 16:08:20 2015
New Revision: 1655374

URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1655374
Log:
Improve grammar, correct name of license

Modified:
    openoffice/ooo-site/trunk/content/why/why_compliance.mdtext

Modified: openoffice/ooo-site/trunk/content/why/why_compliance.mdtext
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/ooo-site/trunk/content/why/why_compliance.mdtext?rev=1655374&r1=1655373&r2=1655374&view=diff
==============================================================================
--- openoffice/ooo-site/trunk/content/why/why_compliance.mdtext (original)
+++ openoffice/ooo-site/trunk/content/why/why_compliance.mdtext Wed Jan 28 16:08:20 2015
@@ -59,13 +59,13 @@ using open source software under these l
 
 However, not all open source licenses are copyleft license.  A subset of open source 
 licenses, generally called "permissive" licenses, are much more friendly for corporate use.  These licenses include the MIT and BSD licenses, as well as the 
-[Apache Software License 2.0][3] that we use for Apache OpenOffice.
+[Apache License 2.0][3] that we use for Apache OpenOffice.
 
 Like other open source licenses, the Apache License explicitly allows you to copy and redistribute the covered product, without any license fees or royalties.  But because it is a
 permissive license, it also allows you to prepare and distribute derivative products, without requiring you to make your own source code public.  So both BSA and SFLC/FSF risks
 are eliminated, and the cost, to your business, of license compliance is greatly reduced.
 
-*The Apache Software Foundation does not take a position, recommend or advise the use or non-use 
+*The Apache Software Foundation does not take a position on, recommend or advise the use or non-use 
 of any particular software license or family of licenses.*