Bugzilla – Full Text Bug Listing
| Summary: | EPL FAQ does not clearly state the list of pre-approved OSS licenses for redistributions by Eclipse projects | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Community | Reporter: | Benjamin Cabé <contact> |
| Component: | License | Assignee: | Mike Milinkovich <mike.milinkovich> |
| Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | QA Contact: | |
| Severity: | normal | ||
| Priority: | P3 | CC: | janet.campbell, mike.milinkovich, wayne.beaton |
| Version: | unspecified | ||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | PC | ||
| OS: | Mac OS X | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
|
Description
Benjamin Cabé
(In reply to comment #0) > This FAQ item should either refer to page 2 of the Eclipse IP in cartoon, or > actually list the approved licenses (but then that's one extra place where > the list should be maintained...) I would propose changing the FAQ to include the list. If it turns out to be a problem maintaining the list in two places, we could update the cartoon to refer to the FAQ. It is better to have the list in a html document on our website, as opposed to embedded in a pdf. New text of answer: What licenses are acceptable for third-party code redistributed by Eclipse projects? Eclipse views license compatibility through the lens of enabling successful commercial adoption of Eclipse technology in software products and services. We wish to create a commercial ecosystem based on the redistribution of Eclipse software technologies in commercially licensed software products. Determining whether a license for third-party code is acceptable often requires the input and advice of Eclipse’s legal advisors. If you have any questions, please contact license@eclipse.org. The current list of licenses approved for use by third-party code redistributed by Eclipse projects is: •Apache Software License 1.1 •Apache Software License 2.0 •W3C Software License •Common Public License Version 1.0 •IBM Public License 1.0 •Mozilla Public License Version 1.1 •Common Development and Distribution License (CDDL) Version 1.0 •GNU Free Documentation License Version 1.3 •BSD •MIT Licenses that are not approved for use include: •GNU GPL 2.0 •GNU LGPL •Sun Binary Code License Agreement (In reply to comment #1) > (In reply to comment #0) > > This FAQ item should either refer to page 2 of the Eclipse IP in cartoon, or > > actually list the approved licenses (but then that's one extra place where > > the list should be maintained...) > > I would propose changing the FAQ to include the list. If it turns out to be > a problem maintaining the list in two places, we could update the cartoon to > refer to the FAQ. It is better to have the list in a html document on our > website, as opposed to embedded in a pdf. > > New text of answer: > > What licenses are acceptable for third-party code redistributed by Eclipse > projects? > > Eclipse views license compatibility through the lens of enabling successful > commercial adoption of Eclipse technology in software products and services. > We wish to create a commercial ecosystem based on the redistribution of > Eclipse software technologies in commercially licensed software products. > Determining whether a license for third-party code is acceptable often > requires the input and advice of Eclipse’s legal advisors. If you have any > questions, please contact license@eclipse.org. > > The current list of licenses approved for use by third-party code > redistributed by Eclipse projects is: > > •Apache Software License 1.1 > •Apache Software License 2.0 > •W3C Software License > •Common Public License Version 1.0 > •IBM Public License 1.0 > •Mozilla Public License Version 1.1 > •Common Development and Distribution License (CDDL) Version 1.0 > •GNU Free Documentation License Version 1.3 > •BSD > •MIT > > Licenses that are not approved for use include: > > •GNU GPL 2.0 > •GNU LGPL > •Sun Binary Code License Agreement +1 I've updated the FAQ. Please check out http://www.eclipse.org/legal/eplfaq.php#3RDPARTY Marking as resolved+fixed. |