On Friday 28 March 2003 17:45, Pier Fumagalli wrote: > On 28/3/03 6:54 am, "Kevin O'Neill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 5. Products derived from this software may not be called "Apache", nor > > may "Apache" appear in their name, without prior written permission of > > the Apache Software Foundation.
> It is not 4 in my own opinion... I believe it's more point 5: > "Apache" may not appear in the name of a product derived from this > software: clearly a single Java class is an entity of its own... If it's a > modified version of our copy it's a "derived product" and the derived > product name (only THAT class I can download through CVS) is > "org.apache.abcde.MyOwn"... Yeah, I think it is rather safe to say that if you "derive" from Apache code you can not use package org.apache... without permission. Irony is, if you don't derive from Apache sources, I strongly doubt that the Sun "package name recommendations" will hold up in court, and I doubt that ASF will challange such. There is actually a twist here. If I derive the class org.apache.abc.Def with an additional line of code, would I then have to move the class elsewhere, and change the 200 references in other classes, and by modifying those classes, have to move all other classes as well?? If so, then I am violating the Apache license in my JServ hack to serve WML content... Niclas
