Hi Greg, *,
I pull this in a new thread, as it is basic for understanding the
difference between OCA and ICLA.
Greg Stein schrieb:
Let's also not forget that neither TDF nor the ASF require copyright
assignment. The copyright remains with the contributor.
Same thing with OCA. You don't/didn't "sell" your copy right instead it
Thus, the patch can be offered to the TDF under its suggested
LGPLv3/MPL combination, and offered separately to the ASF under an
I don't see the basical difference between OCA and ICLA here.
Of course I see the difference between Oracle as a commercial company
and Apache Software Foundation as a charity. :o))
(*) strictly speaking, you do not offer code to the ASF under any
specific license. your ICLA grants the ASF a right to release your
code under a license of its choosing.
which is basically the same Oracle can do with contributions granted
under terms of OCA.
By the way: If this topic already was discussed elsewhere I appreciate
an archive link.
LibreOffice and more on CD/DVD images
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
- [tdf-discuss] OCA vs. ICLA: two names - one thing? (was: Triple licensing?) · Friedrich Strohmaier
Impressum (Legal Info)
: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our trademark policy