Hi Sarah and Kevin, Thanks for your thoughtful follow-up.
Based on all of this, it seems that this question will need to be submitted to ASF Legal for consideration. I think it is quite clear that this is a good-faith effort to abide by the spirit of the ASF 3rd Party License Policy, but the specific details will need to be considered by ASF Legal. > The binaries we plan to submit, and the accompanying license, > are similar to the use cases listed under “Handling Licenses That > Prevent Modification” [3] in the Category B description. While most > of the contents of the distributed MLTBX file would be Apache- > licensed, the compiled MEX functions would be dynamically linked > against proprietary MathWorks shared libraries, which would cause > inclusion of non-Apache licensed object code. Yes, I think that is the right approach to pursue with ASF Legal: asking them to add the license that governs the MEX functions to the list of approved licenses under [3]. Thanks, Ian On Fri, Jan 26, 2024 at 10:56 AM Sarah Gilmore <sgilm...@mathworks.com.invalid> wrote: > > Hi all, > > After consulting with some of our colleagues at MathWorks, we wanted to > follow-up on this thread. > > Before going through the official ASF legal process, we wanted to give the > community some insight into our thinking about why our proposed license may > be appropriate for Category B consideration. > > Our interpretation of the ASF 3rd Party License Policy [1] was that Category > B licenses are not limited to standard licenses, but, rather, must meet the > Appropriately Labelled Condition and the Binary-Only Inclusion Condition. The > proposed license [2] we shared is intended to meet these conditions. However, > we understand that our interpretation may not be accurate. > > The binaries we plan to submit, and the accompanying license, are similar to > the use cases listed under “Handling Licenses That Prevent Modification” [3] > in the Category B description. While most of the contents of the distributed > MLTBX file would be Apache-licensed, the compiled MEX functions would be > dynamically linked against proprietary MathWorks shared libraries, which > would cause inclusion of non-Apache licensed object code. > > The goal of the proposed license is to allow the MLTBX file to be used and > distributed freely as an official ASF release artifact. Ideally, MathWorks > would like to restrict reverse engineering and modification of the > proprietary components and the proposed license includes a clause for this > restriction. Since the MATLAB Interface to Arrow will likely only be useful > to users of MathWorks products, our hope is that this restriction would not > be an impediment to users. > > We understand this is an unusual situation and appreciate the community's > support in helping us identify a solution. > > [1] https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html > [2] https://github.com/apache/arrow/files/13955180/license.txt > [3] https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#no-modification > > Best Regards, > > Sarah and Kevin > > > From: Sarah Gilmore <sgilm...@mathworks.com> > Sent: Friday, January 19, 2024 1:58 PM > To: dev@arrow.apache.org <dev@arrow.apache.org> > Cc: Kevin Gurney <kgur...@mathworks.com> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS][MATLAB] Proposed "Category B" License for Bundling > MATLAB MEX Build Artifacts in Official Arrow Release > > Hi Roman, > > > FWIW: while these are all excellent questions for the pre-work, if there > > needs to be an ultimate statement on this -- you'll have to file a LEGAL > > JIRA. E.g.: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-506 > > > > (plz include all the relevant details when filing it -- whatever comes > > out of this thread). > > Thank you for the guidance. We suspected this may be the case and will be > sure to include all the relevant information when we file the Jira issue. > > Best, > > Sarah and Kevin > > From: Roman Shaposhnik <r...@apache.org> > Sent: Friday, January 19, 2024 12:15 PM > To: dev@arrow.apache.org <dev@arrow.apache.org> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS][MATLAB] Proposed "Category B" License for Bundling > MATLAB MEX Build Artifacts in Official Arrow Release > > On Thu, Jan 18, 2024 at 12:24 PM Ian Cook <ianmc...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > Hi Sarah, > > > > Thanks for pursuing this. > > > > The ASF 3rd Party License Policy lists a number of standard, > > off-the-shelf licenses that are compatible with Category B, but the > > policy does not include any provision for custom-written licenses. > > This appears to be a custom-written license. Is that correct? > > > > Is this custom-written license based on one of the listed Category B > > licenses? If so, can you tell us which one? If not, can you provide > > some explanation of why this license should be considered to meet the > > criteria for Category B? > > FWIW: while these are all excellent questions for the pre-work, if there > needs to be an ultimate statement on this -- you'll have to file a LEGAL > JIRA. E.g.: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-506 > > (plz include all the relevant details when filing it -- whatever comes > out of this thread). > > Thanks, > Roman. > > > > > > Thank you, > > Ian > > > > On Wed, Jan 17, 2024 at 12:08 PM Sarah Gilmore > > <sgilm...@mathworks.com.invalid> wrote: > > > > > > Hi Everyone, > > > > > > Kevin Gurney and I have been working on integrating the MATLAB Arrow > > > bindings with the project's release processes in this pull request [1]. > > > While working on integrating with the release tooling, we realized that > > > we need to ensure that the licenses of any MEX artifacts [2] bundled with > > > the released MLTBX [3] file are compatible with the ASF 3rd Party License > > > Policy [4]. > > > > > > After several rounds of discussion with some colleagues at MathWorks, we > > > came up with a license [5] that is intended to meet the requirements for > > > inclusion as a "Category B" [6] license according to the ASF 3rd Party > > > License Policy. > > > > > > Our goal is to make sure we are doing the right thing here, so, as per > > > Kou's suggestion [7], we wanted to share the proposed license [5] with > > > the broader Arrow development community. We understand this may need > > > further input from ASF Legal as well. > > > > > > Please let us know what we can do to help move this forward. We sincerely > > > appreciate everyone's support as we navigate these licensing requirements. > > > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/38660 > > > [2] https://www.mathworks.com/help/matlab/call-mex-functions.html > > > [3] > > > https://www.mathworks.com/help/matlab/creating-help.html?s_tid=CRUX_lftnav > > > [4] https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html > > > [5] https://github.com/apache/arrow/files/13955180/license.txt > > > [6] https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-b > > > [7] https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/38660#discussion_r1454804607 > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > Sarah Gilmore > > >
