Top-Post meta-comment - Dennis answered on legal-discuss - if you wish to follow:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-discuss/201207.mbox/browser Regards, Dave On Jul 16, 2012, at 3:30 PM, Kevan Miller wrote: > > On Jul 16, 2012, at 3:16 PM, Rob Weir wrote: > >> On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 2:57 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton >> <dennis.hamil...@acm.org> wrote: >>> I suggest that one not be so careless about asserting ASF copyright on >>> third party materials. >>> >>> Why does this meme persist? >>> >> >> Why is there a copyright notice on the ASF home page? I assume that >> is a copyright on the arrangement and selection of pages, as well as >> the look and feel as set by the CSS, etc. The ASF, via the >> collaboration of its members, create a website that is not merely the >> sum of the individual pages, but is a creative work in itself, similar >> to a copyright that can exist on an anthology of poetry independent of >> the copyright for the individual poems. >> >> >>> Please consult Legal before doing anything so outrageous. >>> >> >> I don't see the outrage here with there being a copyright on the ASF >> homepage. Remember, *all* material on Apache websites is 3rd party, >> unless done as a work for hire by an Apache employee. The iCLA does >> not assign copyright to Apache. So we're not asserting a copyright on >> 3rd party material. > > Agreed. > >> >> Note that we do the same thing in every Apache release, when we put an >> ASF copyright statement in the NOTICE file. Is that also an "outrage" >> against 3rd party contributions? >> >> Maybe the key is to find a way to make it clear that the copyright is >> on the site as a whole, but that individual pages remain under the >> copyright of their individual authors? > > I haven't read the entire discussion thread. Is that really necessary? > > Just double checking -- this material is apache licensed? > > --kevan
