On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 6:55 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton <dennis.hamil...@acm.org> wrote: > There have been proposals for providing terms of use for the Apache hosting > that also honor what the incoming agreements were for already-existing > material. It has also been said that all that is needed is to apply an > Apache ALv2 notice. That's problematic for material contributed under other > conditions, especially with specific copyright and license notices. >
It seems like a no-brainer to put a statement in there *now* that says new content is contributed under Apache 2.0. It might take longer to figure out privacy policy and other notices. But that shouldn't prevent us from stating the obvious, especially when we receive a note that says there are people waiting to contribute *now*. We can always supplement with additional clauses to the ToU as they are reviewed, etc. Remember, what we have now is a wiki with zero statement on copyright or license. That is not helping anyone. > It has been suggested that the PPMC needed to decide what it wanted and then > ask legal@ what could be had. I know of no action taken on that suggestion > though. Now might be a good time. > > It was also recommended (over at legal-discuss@) that Oracle terms should not > appear on an ASF-hosted property. That has not been implemented. > > One place that has a specific discussion is this Bugzilla issue, which > proposes a constant ToU for all of the OpenOffice.org web properties hosted > by the ASF: > > <https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=118518> > > This document is annotated to show the changes and how the current > contributions are still covered. There's a lot of room for discussion, > although some of the questions can only be answered by legal@. > > It is also important to have a privacy statement, although I don't know if > the ASF is interested in adhering to the US-EU Safe Harbor arrangement for > Data Protection and Privacy. Oracle did and that applied by reference in the > Oracle ToU. There also needs to be an explicit contact for take-down notices. > > There has been limited legal-discuss@ on this, although there is a companion > issue there, LEGAL-104, with considerable comment discussion: > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-104>. > These are all interesting questions. But I don't think we need this to be a bottleneck in order to make it clear that new contributions are under ALv2. This would clear the way for the French users who are ready to contribute now. -Rob > - Dennis > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org] > Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2011 15:02 > To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: [Discuss] Wiki licence > > On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 10:45 AM, FR web forum <ooofo...@free.fr> wrote: >> Hello, >> >> French users would be ready to publish on the Wiki. But which licence apply? >> This page is empty: >> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/OpenOffice.org_Wiki:Copyrights >> > > IMHO, we should be requiring Apache 2.0 on all new wiki contributions. > It puzzles me that this is not yet reflected in the terms of use. > > -Rob > > >> Regards >> > >
