Search Results

Looking at the repository in question, I see no mention of the Apache License other than its inclusion as a file. The README indicates no intent to license any part of the project under this (or any) …

Even in the event that your friend is correct, it sounds like the author(s) of the new mod have not yet released it, so they are not yet committing copyright infringement for failure to attribute any …

A "license" simply means legal permission to do something from a rightsholder. The relevant question is: if the rightsholder sued you for exercising some right (e.g., copying or modifying their copyri …

Not only do GitHub's terms of service codify that the submission would be covered under the Apache 2 license, so too does the Apache 2 license itself: "Contribution" shall mean any work of authorship …

What is not clear for me, is it mandatory to have the resulting product also under a permissive open source license? No, this resembles a copyleft license (in contrast to a permissive license) which …

Under current legal precedent in the United States, LibreOffice et al. did not commit copyright infringement. Look to Lotus v. Borland for the U.S. precedent allowing duplication of interfaces. The co …

Does the fact that I sign and distribute runtime & SDK used to write the component oblige me to change the component's license to MIT / Apache2? No, software under Apache 2 or MIT/Expat/X11 licenses …

The X11/MIT license, the Apache 2.0 license, and the Mozilla Public License 2.0 are all compatible with the GNU GPL version 3, which means you may include code licensed under those various licenses in …

I'm not a lawyer, but I don't find this mistake alarming at all. In the worst possible case, that such a statement really did license the work to the ASF, the ASF probably wouldn't ever exercise that …

Only a legal entity can hold a copyright. However, it is worth noting that your copyright notice is not legally significant, since it has virtually no legal effect. Generally speaking, in an overwhelm …

First, let me be clear that a person who modifies your Apache-licensed work is free to release their own changes under the GPL. The Apache 2 License is a permissive license that is compatible with the …

But where is stated that – in the license between the third party and myself – I must require them to adhere to the Apache License? The original copyright holder offered certain permissions to mo …

If you hold the copyright to some code (usually, because you are the author), you may license that code however you please, and you may issue different licenses at any time. The matter of revoking pre …

Preface: I'm no longer sure this answer is correct, since the patent license terms only apply to the specific "Work" you are offering, and do not include the right to "modify" or similar. However, thi …

Since you don't distribute the software, you have no distribution-related obligations. (However, double-check if this really true. Notably, if you're running a Web service, check if any licensed code …