Re: What is the legal basis for enforcing release policies at ASF?

On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 7:23 AM, Benson Margulies <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 9:52 AM, Jim Jagielski <jim-wnqjnsUU/[email protected]> wrote:
>> Coming in late.
>>
>> A snapshot is not a release. Licenses "kick in" at distribution/
>> release.
>
> Are you sure? When you have a public source control repo, with a
> LICENSE file at the top, I would think that this counts as a legal
> 'publication' under the terms of the license.
>
> if not, just what is the legal status of source code snipped from our
> repositories?

I agree with Jim that "a snapshot is not a release".  I also agree with him
that licenses "kick in" at distribution.  As to whether they kick in at
"distribution/release", I think that's a weird bit of wording, and I would be
surprised if we are not all in agreement here.

There were long threads on this topic back in 2007-2009 on
legal-discuss@apache.

    http://markmail.org/message/jangmpbssvvd73az
    http://s.apache.org/6Wm

    http://markmail.org/message/xietapwmthvvknex
    http://s.apache.org/H6o

Here's are a couple germane points from Roy:

    http://markmail.org/message/vbfjep4r2npkwufa
    http://s.apache.org/aXK

        Copyright law has no concept of software development. So, when a
        lawyer looks at

            http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/trunk/

        what the lawyer (or even layperson) sees is a website.

    http://markmail.org/message/44ezdre3se3ov5nu
    http://s.apache.org/MEC

        > SVN is not a distribution point.

        Of course it is a distribution point. Distribution == copy to someone
        else. It isn't a release (an editorial decision by the ASF).

Marvin Humphrey