Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2011 Archives by date, by thread · List index

Greg Stein wrote:

As Ben has explained later in this thread, you never had that right.
Ergo, Apache has not removed any rights from You.

This is why I think the statement "removes rights from people's
contributions" is wrong, or there is some other right that I'm unaware

GPL does say that if you make a derivative work and distribute it to someone
else, you must provide that person with the source code under the terms of
the GPL so that they may modify and redistribute it under the terms of the
GPL as well.

The Apache license says you don't have to distribute under the same license
and therefore you don't have to provide the source code.

In the context of a public free Office Suite isn't that the same? If under
GPL you MUST release the source as GPL, isn't that in practical terms the
same as releasing the modifications you made???

Doesn't this mean that changing the license to Apache removes the right to
have access to the modified source code if a company so chooses?

View this message in context:
Sent from the Discuss mailing list archive at

Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: 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.