Re: The new apache license

["Edward A. Gardner" <eag@ophidian.com>]

At 16:38 18-02-2004, Theo de Raadt wrote:
>And another license issue..
>
>The new apache license is not acceptable.  Code written under that
>new license will never go into our tree.

I've reviewed the Apache licenses (both old and new), the OpenBSD license 
policy page (policy.html), the Apache license discussion archives, and the 
discussion on misc.  I have not been able to determine what is 
objectionable about the new Apache license.  Could you please clarify 
this?  It is difficult to object to Apache, et.al. without knowing what one 
is supposed to object to.

Possibilities that come to mind:

1.  The old Apache license was essentially identical to the BSD 
license.  The new Apache license is very different (to put it 
mildly).  OpenBSD's policy is to only include software (in the kernel and 
similar core functions) covered by the BSD license or a license essentially 
identical to the BSD license.

2.  The new Apache license is too complex.  Any license that tempts one to 
consult a lawyer is unacceptable.  (This is similar to #1 but not quite the 
same -- could a simple license that was not identical to the BSD license be 
acceptable?)

3.  The redistribution requirements are unacceptable.  Note that, by my 
reading, the only difference is the requirement to include the Apache 
license and NOTICE text files in the relevant tar ball.  As these will be 
part of the Apache source tree, this doesn't seem onerous.  Am I missing 
something?

4.  Some other specific clause is unacceptable, such as clause 3 (patent 
licensing).


Note to those reading this on misc: the Xfree86 and Apache license are very 
different and may have different issues.  In particular, clause 2 of the 
Xfree86 license requires that binary distributions include the entire text 
of the license "in the same place and form as other copyright, license and 
disclaimer information".  That means, for example, that if a copyright 
statement appears on the face of a CD, then the entire Xfree86 license must 
also appear on the face of the CD, which is physically difficult if not 
impossible.

Reminder: further discussion of the Xfree86 license belongs on their forum, 
not here on misc.  All that is appropriate for misc is OpenBSD's license 
policy.


Edward A. Gardner               eag at ophidian dot com
Ophidian Designs                719 593-8866 voice
1262 Hofstead Terrace           719 210-7200 cell
Colorado Springs, CO  80907