Re: [location-iwg] uDig proposal - license

["Mike Milinkovich" <mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Jody,

Answers are inlined below. Normal caveats apply: I am most definitely and quite proudly not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice.

> -----Original Message-----
> In doing the research for this activity I found the following:
> -  A Guide to the Legal Documentation for Eclipse-Based Content
> - http://www.eclipse.org/legal/epl/about.php
> - The about.html

Generally speaking, I think those documents are correct and should be used by LocationTech as-is. 

The reason why is that although LocationTech will have its own identity, forge, and namespace, LocationTech is not actually a legal entity. So saying that code comes from LocationTech, or is distributed by LocationTech would be incorrect IMHO. Or stating it the other way around, the Eclipse SUA, About files, fileheaders, etc. would all apply to LocationTech code and projects.

The checklists in Guide to Legal Documentation do reference org.eclipse everywhere, but those really are examples.

All that said, there are a few places where the language in the documentation needs to be updated. For example in [1] states:

      The first one is for plug-ins where all of the content is to be licensed under the Eclipse Public License (EPL).

It should read something along the lines of:

       The first one is for plug-ins where all of the content is to be licensed under the licenses approved for use by the project, most typically the Eclipse Public License (EPL).

I think that the correct solution is for the Eclipse Foundation to update those documents to be more general purpose, rather than having LocationTech maintain its own forks of those documents.

[1] http://www.eclipse.org/legal/epl/about.php 

> Q: How much of the above needs to be adapted to work in the Context of
> LocationTech?
> 
> - Example: http://www.eclipse.org/legal/copyrightandlicensenotice.php <-
> covers standard header

Actually, I think that copyright header is just fine the way it is. What's needed is to improve the documentation so we have fileheader templates for the other licenses (BSD, ALv2, etc.)

> 
> Q: When working under the LocationTech banner, do we need to engage the
> language around "redistribution of Eclipse.org content"

As I stated above, I think that the answer is 'yes', as the Eclipse Foundation is the legal entity involved here.

I hope that all makes sense, and is helpful.

If anyone thinks I got it wrong, or if it causes anyone major heartburn please let me know.