<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div>See also the complete history:</div><div><br></div><div><span style="font-family: '.HelveticaNeueUI'; font-size: 15px; line-height: 19px; white-space: nowrap; -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.296875); -webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(175, 192, 227, 0.230469); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(77, 128, 180, 0.230469); -webkit-text-size-adjust: none; "><a href="http://www.python.org/download/releases/2.5/license/">http://www.python.org/download/releases/2.5/license/</a></span></div><div><span style="font-family: '.HelveticaNeueUI'; font-size: 15px; line-height: 19px; white-space: nowrap; -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.296875); -webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(175, 192, 227, 0.230469); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(77, 128, 180, 0.230469); -webkit-text-size-adjust: none; "><br></span></div><div><span style="font-family: '.HelveticaNeueUI'; font-size: 15px; line-height: 19px; white-space: nowrap; -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.296875); -webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(175, 192, 227, 0.230469); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(77, 128, 180, 0.230469); -webkit-text-size-adjust: none; ">License in and license out would require lots of legal time and money to approach beOpen/cnri and others to flatten the stack</span></div><div><br>On Aug 14, 2013, at 9:15 PM, Jesse Noller <<a href="mailto:jnoller@gmail.com">jnoller@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><span></span><br><span></span><br><span>On Aug 14, 2013, at 9:08 PM, Ben Finney <<a href="mailto:ben+python@benfinney.id.au">ben+python@benfinney.id.au</a>> wrote:</span><br><span></span><br><blockquote type="cite"><span>Jesse Noller <<a href="mailto:jnoller@gmail.com">jnoller@gmail.com</a>> writes:</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>On Aug 14, 2013, at 7:53 PM, Ben Finney <<a href="mailto:ben+python@benfinney.id.au">ben+python@benfinney.id.au</a>> wrote:</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>So what is the difference that means Wikimedia Foundation do not ask</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>for additional agreement documents, while PSF do ask for additional</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>agreement documents from the contributor?</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>Python is distributed to end users in packaged form, on operating</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>systems and elsewhere. Wikipedia is distributed online and is done via</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>mass collaboration.</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>Both of those are true for both Python and Wikipedia:</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>* Python is distributed online via mass collaboration, in the VCS</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span> repository.</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span> What salient legal difference is there from Wikipedia's mass</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span> collaboration and online distribution?</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>* Wikipedia is distributed to end users in packaged form (for one</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span> example of many, the WikiReader device). Indeed, this is a primary</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span> purpose of Wikipedia, to produce an encyclopedia useful for packaging</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span> and distribution under free-software terms to those without reliable</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span> internet access.</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span> What salient difference is there from Python's distribution to end</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span> users in packaged form?</span><br></blockquote><span></span><br><span>Allowance for redistribution, even under non free licenses. Additionally, you have to account for the Python license itself which is actually a "stack" stemming from the old beOpen days, python labs etc.</span><br><span></span><br><span>All if this means we also need to worry about copyright assignment for legal redistribution by the PSF, OS vendors, non free implementations, etc.</span><br><span></span><br><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>I'm not asking for you to defend what Wikimedia Foundation have decided.</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>But I am asking for why the PSF requires additional agreement documents,</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>when other free-software organisations, performing what seem to be</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>legally-equivalent collaborations and redistributions, do not require</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>these additional agreements.</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>If there's a salient difference, I have yet to have it presented. If</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>there's not a salient difference, I don't see why the CLA is required.</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>It would be next to impossible to prove legal provenance of the</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>changes on Wikipedia. This means distributing the text in any</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>commercial form is legally questionable.</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>Yet it is explicitly permitted by the license. The license was carefully</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>chosen to encourage commercial redistribution of Wikipedia, and people</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>do it.</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>For python: we have to (as the PSF) be able to prove that the people</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>committing the code have rights to that code.</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>Okay. That's not a reason to ask for a licensing agreement from the</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>contributor, though. It's reason to ask for an affirmation of the</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>provenance of the contribution. No additional powers required.</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>For example, if I, working for Foo, submit code to core, I must have a</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>CLA in place from that company stating from the company and myself</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>that I have the legal rights to submit that code and it is OK for the</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>PSF to redistribute that code.</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>Why is this a special agreement with the PSF, though? The PSF already</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>has full permission to do everything the Apache License allows.</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>If that permission is already in the license on the contribution,</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>why does the PSF require it again in a special agreement document?</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>The special agreement document is the contributor agreement which</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>companies, employees, and individuals sign to agree to license the</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>changes under the Apache 2 license.</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>I would be happy to sign such a document, asserting the work is licensed</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>to all recipients under the Apache License version 2. It says nothing</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>about any special arrangement with PSF.</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>-- </span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>\ “Ocean, n. A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a |</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span> `\ world made for man — who has no gills.” —Ambrose Bierce, _The |</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>_o__) Devil's Dictionary_, 1906 |</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>Ben Finney</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>_______________________________________________</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>Python-legal-sig mailing list</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span><a href="mailto:Python-legal-sig@python.org">Python-legal-sig@python.org</a></span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span><a href="http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-legal-sig">http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-legal-sig</a></span><br></blockquote></div></blockquote></body></html>