robert burrell donkin wrote: > On 7/31/05, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>On Jul 30, 2005, at 7:36 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote: >> >> >>>may i suggest that a practical workaround for the issue (that started >>>this debate) would be to ask all contributors to use jira. >> >>LOL. Yes, we're going to use JIRA. That's not the issue at all - >>we're talking about the mailing list. > > > why not ask anyone who posts a contribution significant enough to be > copyrightable (AIUI very small patches just one or two lines probably > are not) to submit it through JIRA? > > once this becomes embedded as a social convention, the whole question > of licenses for contributions through the mailing list would become > moot. > > IMHO the whole concept of a default license for a mailing list is > problematic. it's hard to see how we could ensure that users have > given knowing consent. > > with the ASL2, apache is covered through the license but AIUI this > does not extend to sublicensing. personally speaking, i do not accept > new files contributed through the lists which do not have the ASL2 > boiler plate at the top. this way is common at apache. it is very > difficult to see how a user posting code with a specific license to a > mailing list is given knowing consent for that license to be removed > and replaced by a different license by a third party. it all seems a > little fuzzy legally.
IANAL, but I have read the Apache License. I'd suggest that you take a look at section 5 of the Apache License, Version 2.0. It is one paragraph, and not particularly dense. "any Contribution intentionally submitted for inclusion in the Work by You to the Licensor shall be under the terms and conditions of this License, without any additional terms or conditions." If that isn't specific enough, take a look at the definition of "Contribution" in section 1. "including but not limited to communication on electronic mailing lists, source code control systems, and issue tracking systems" And, what are the "terms and conditions of this License"? Section 2 grants licensees the right to sublicense the copyrights held by each Contributor. Unless you can figure out a way to explain how somebody can submit a patch to software without being aware of the license for that software, then this isn't very fuzzy to me. At all. - Sam Ruby --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
