On Wednesday, March 11, 2015, RA Stehmann <anw...@rechtsanwalt-stehmann.de>
wrote:
> On 11.03.2015 10:53, jan i wrote:
> > On 11 March 2015 at 10:33, Guy Waterval <waterval....@gmail.com
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> As it seems that I will be retired in advance (4 years) in July, I will
> >> have more time and I plan to join another project. As this project uses
> a
> >> different licence (CC-BY-SA 3.0), I would use for my original
> >> contributions, currently under ALv2.0, a double licence (ALv2.0 and
> >> CC-BY-SA 3.0) to make my contributions regarding OpenOffice (currently
> docs
> >> only) available for the 2 projects.
> >>
> > We do not have a problem with double licensing, actually it is in use for
> > quite a number of places.
> >
> > The preferred way is of course to submit the original with the ALv2
> > license, and then add the CC-BY-SA 3.0 license when committing to the
> > second project. This is the standard way with absolutely no problems
> > independent of how closed or open the second license is.
> >
> > You can also add the double license directly in our repo, here we would
> > need to look more careful at the license to see if it limits our own
> usage
> > or that of downstream projects.
> >
> A second license in addition to ALv2.0 can't limit the usage because the
> user has the choice to contract one or both of the licenses.
>
> But: if a user creates a derived work and puts it unter CC-BY_SA only,
> Apache can't use the derived work.
he cannot remove the ALv2 license legally, so he needs to write explicitly
that the changes are only available as CC-BY_SA, something most users do
not do. To write it explicitly is important because once the code is
inserted into the file, nobody can see which part is which license,
therefore both licenses will apply to the full file.
If you have a file with 2 licenses and no exceptions you can choose between
the 2 or maybe add a 3rd.
I have lately had talks with people specializing in this, and it seems life
is actually quite simple, but we often tend to make it complicated
especially because we know about version control, something a lawyer do not
care about.
rgds
jan i
>
> ("Use" includes also "improve" and "share".)
>
> So the problem is the use of improvements.
>
> Kind regards
> Michael
>
>
>
--
Sent from My iPad, sorry for any misspellings.
