Hi, > Agreed. Any argument to put copyright attribution anywhere is essentially > claiming it to be an uncommon situation, especially since it isn't called > out in [1]. Well actually it is, AL is a permissive license. It no different to MIT or BSD in that regard, the only difference being is that in most cases there no need to add it to LICENSE as the AL licence and copyright owner is already mentioned. ie the ASF
There is noting stating that it needs to be added to the NOTICE file here [1] which is where I would expect it to be. Note it does mention CC media but say changes may need to be made to LICENCE and/or NOTICE. In [2] under "modifications to NOTICE" note: "NOTICE is reserved for a certain subset of legally required notifications which are not satisfied by either the text of LICENSE " Also the NOTICE file is informational only [3]: "The contents of the NOTICE file are for informational purposes only and do not modify the License." Basically A NOTICE is informational document, while LICENSE is legal document. For Apache License changes to the NOTICE are not required by the license, the only clause (as I said before) is 4.4 ie.e a retention clause covering any NOTICE distributed with the original. BTW Apache Whisper tries to get around all these softs of issue by specifying everything in XML and generating the LICENSE and NOTICE files. [4] It's FAQ is a useful read. [5] "A NOTICE is informational documentation, whereas a copyright notice informs a reader about a legal claim of ownership" and "copyright notice is governed directly by statue." Justin 1. http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#asking-questions 2. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#permissive-deps 3. http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 4. http://creadur.apache.org/whisker/ 5. http://creadur.apache.org/whisker/faq.html
