BSD license as in "with advertising clause" or as in "new BSD license without advertising clause? IANAL, but my impression is that the reply depends on that.
Jochen On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 2:27 PM, Ross Gardler <rgard...@apache.org> wrote: > Over on the Clerezza project I've been asked some advice about a legal > situation that I'm not 100% sure about, I'm pretty sure it's a simple case > so I'm asking the IPMC rather than legal-discuss@ > > In short: > > - there is a few files that are part of an existing FOAF+SSL certification > project (BSD licence) that Clerezza would like to include with some minor > modifications (it's a complete unit of functionality, not just a small > patch). > > - the copyright holder (University of Manchester) may consent to submission > to the ASF under the terms of the CLA - but depending on what level of > approval is needed this could take time, so we are wondering if it is > necessary in this case since it is already BSD licensed. > > My questions are: > > Would it be acceptable to just include the file with the BSD licence and > copyright headers since they are license compatible. > > If not.. > > Would we require a CCLA from Manchester or would an iCLA be sufficient (at > this point I'm unclear if the code is written by the developer working with > the Clerezza team or by someone else at Manchester). > > Advice on the best way to proceed would be very helpful. > > Thanks, > Ross > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > > -- I Am What I Am And That's All What I Yam (Popeye) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
