[legal-discuss] StackForge and IP.

Jeremy Stanley fungi at yuggoth.org
Wed May 6 15:07:34 UTC 2015


On 2015-05-06 10:39:45 -0400 (-0400), Richard Fontana wrote:
[...]
> However it is not the case that the OpenStack CLAs "simply reinforce
> the OpenStack Foundation's ability to continue to redistribute the
> software under the Apache License by affirming that the terms of the
> license are applied correctly and intentionally". That is what the
> DCO, or a hypothetical differently-drafted CLA, would do; the
> OpenStack CLAs are broader license grants to the OpenStack Foundation.

Thanks for the clarification. I tried to figure out how to word
that, but it's still not entirely clear to me _what_ additional
broadness is granted by the OpenStack Foundation ICLA. I'd love it
if we had an FAQ with a summary of that additional broadness we
could point people to, though I gather lawyers are generally against
the idea of summaries of legal agreements since they would counter
that the agreement itself is already as summarized as it can be
(which doesn't help when it takes a lawyer to interpret and explain
it every time the question comes up).
-- 
Jeremy Stanley



More information about the legal-discuss mailing list