The purpose of the CLA is actually to protect the end user against a
contributor contributing protected IP. You assign a non-revocable
license to Zend which Zend then relicenses under New BSD. The Zend
Framework license is intended to benefit people who use ZF in their own
application. It benefits us by protecting us from IP lawsuits. It
benefits the contributor because they retain their copyright on their
code and can re-license it to other parties under whatever licensing
terms the contributor wants as well. It's basically a win-win-win
situation.
Kevin
-----Original Message-----
From: web400-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:web400-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Nathan Andelin
Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2010 10:29 AM
To: Web Enabling the AS400 / iSeries
Subject: Re: [WEB400] powerEXT - Clarifications from the author
I'm not a lawyer either, but consider the license granted by Zend to the
public:
http://framework.zend.com/license
Then consider the license granted to Zend by contributors:
http://framework.zend.com/framework_cla_1.0.pdf
It quickly becomes apparent that both licenses are in Zend's favor.
Nathan.
----- Original Message ----
From: Kevin Schroeder <kevin@xxxxxxxx>
To:Web Enabling the AS400 / iSeries <web400@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wed, January 20, 2010 8:37:13 AM
Subject: Re: [WEB400] powerEXT - Clarifications from the author
Would not the same copyright law apply to GPL and other licenses? Also,
I'm not a copyright lawyer by any stretch of the imagination, but this
seems to imply that the grant of the license may only be revoked during
a 5 year period following the conclusion of a 35 year period where it
cannot be arbitrarily revoked. It also requires that advance notice be
given in writing which is signed by the copyright owner(s). Again, not
a copyright lawyer, but this subsection doesn't have me overly
concerned. I'll have to check my book on copyright at home to see what
it says about implied copyright and terms of licenses.
Kevin
midrange.com
