Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2013 Archives by date, by thread · List index

I understand that differences between licences are technical and seem
trivial to end-users.

So if not the licences, how is LO different from AOO? In terms that
end-users can understand.

On Dec 31, 2012 8:29 PM, "Dennis E. Hamilton" <>

That is completely incorrect, no matter how many folks keep saying it.

Put simply: using the LibreOffice or Apache OpenOffice distributions does
not raise any practical limitations on most personal use as well as use by
individuals in their business or institutional activities.

 - Dennis

PS: The preferred terms is ALv2 (ASL is something else), or simply Apache


Committers to Apache projects retain all rights, while granting the ASF a
perpetual license to distribute under ASF-chosen license terms.  There is
no transfer of ownership whatsoever.  (Just for a moment of irony, it was
the case that Sun and then Oracle did require a [non-exclusive] transfer of
ownership, as does the Free Software Foundation to this day.)

You can find the ALv2 everywhere.  The Committer License Agreement (CLA)
is here:

The key statement is this:

   "Except for the license granted herein to the Foundation
    and recipients of software distributed by the Foundation,
    You reserve all right, title, and interest in and to
    Your Contributions."

Note that people who simply make use of the ALv2 and distribute their own
(and derivative) work under the ALv2 don't have to make any such grant.  It
is contributors to ASF-sponsored projects that do this.

This is not much difference to the e-mail grants of license that
LibreOffice committers make to the TDF, except those grants name specific
licenses (and say nothing about patents).

The fundamental technical difference is that the Apache ALv2 license is
not a reciprocal license.  It does not require that derivative works be
provided in source code and under the same license.  The ALv2 also has no
limitations on the use of a distribution or its derivative in an embedded
system or inside of a [commercial] distributed service.

The license differences have no practical impact on end users.  It does
have ideological importance to contributors.  Some end users may want to
express their allegiance to one model or the other. In cultivating such
allegiance, it is valuable to stick to the facts.

 - Dennis

-----Original Message-----
From: webmaster-Kracked_P_P []
Sent: Monday, December 31, 2012 12:19
Subject: Re: [tdf-discuss] LO vs AOO : GPL/LGPL vs ASL licences

[ ... ]

As I was told, LO's license will allow the developer to own the coding
they are sharing with the project, where AOO's really will give that
project the ownership of the coding.  Whether or not the "wording" is
stating that, that is what most developers I have "talked" with have
told me.

[ ... ]

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

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.