Purpose and Intended Audience
This document describes how Apache committers and PMC members should handle source file licensing and copyright notices.
It does not apply to developers outside the ASF who are applying the Apache License to their work. The
appendix to the Apache License describes how others can apply
the license to their work. This page also does not describe requirements for
what goes in the standard LICENSE file distributed with each Apache
product release, nor what are the acceptable licenses for distribution of third-party components.
Overview
Apache products are composed of lots of pieces of code across numerous source files, licensed to the ASF by various authors
who maintain ownership of their contributions. When a PMC goes through the process of selecting, coordinating, and arranging
all these various contributions into a single product, the collective work is also protected by copyright law and is owned by
the ASF -- even though each individual piece of code is still owned by the contributor. An Apache product may also
include other components that were not submitted directly to the ASF, but are licensed in such a way
that is consistent with the ASF's licensing practices.
Considering all of these factors, this document describes how to:
This document also includes:
which will be updated as new questions come up on the
legal-discuss mailing list.
Notification of Updates to this Page
Updates to this page are sent to the legal-discuss mailing list.
When must Apache projects comply with this policy?
All releases created and distributed after November 1, 2006 must comply with this policy.
Why is this change required?
Since contributors maintain their copyright ownership in the works they submit, it is misleading to place the ASF
copyright at the top of each source file. The previous ASF copyright notice represented the ASF's ownership in the collective work
of the entire distribution, but placing it at the top of each source file was causing a lot of confusion. To avoid this confusion,
we are placing all copyright notices in a single file and leaving only the licensing information within each source file.
Is it sufficient just to change the headers on files in trunk and active branches?
Yes. Only active branches from which releases are cut need to be updated.
Should a project move non-ASF copyright notices from Apache source files
to the NOTICE file?
No. If the copyright owner is still involved with the project, they should move the notice themselves or permit us to do so.
If the owner cannot be found, the copyright notice should be left as is, but the new licensing header should be added or
substituted for any existing Apache license header.
What scripts are available to update existing source headers?
See https://svn.apache.org/repos/private/committers/
for some examples. In particular, the following files have been updated to reflect the latest header requirement:
- tools/copy2license.pl, and
- relicense/src/perl/{relicense.txt | insert_license.pl | update-AL20.pl}
However, be sure to check that these scripts work for your project's code base. See a
post on legal-discuss on this topic.
Where can I find an example of the NOTICE file that is required to be included
in every ASF release?
Does this policy apply to documentation files included in a release?
Does this policy also apply to content displayed on our web sites?
No. Our web sites do not have an associated NOTICE file. Instead we may soon be making the terms of such content
explicit through a "Terms of Use" or "Legal Information" link in the footer of web pages. At this point, no action is
required for Apache web sites.
What if my project includes its web site within a product distribution?
With few exceptions, all human-readable Apache-developed files that are included within a distribution must
include the header text. Documentation, including web site documentation distributed with the
release, may include the header text within some form of metadata (such as HTML comments) or as a header or footer
appearing in the visible documentation.
What files in an Apache release do not require a license header?
A file without any degree of creativity in either its literal elements or its structure is not protected by
copyright law; therefore, such a file does not require a license header. If in doubt about the extent of the
file's creativity, add the license header to the file.
Does the policy apply to binary/object files, such as executables or JAR files?
Yes. Even if there are no source files within the release, the LICENSE file and NOTICE file are still both required within
every ASF distribution -- whether the unit of distribution is a .jar, .msi, .tar/.?gz, .zip, .exe installer, or any
other file format used for distributions. For example, Windows .exe files must not be used as a unit of distribution
unless they are installers and include the LICENSE and NOTICE files in their installation.
Does this policy apply to third-party binary/object files included within an ASF release?
Yes. See the policy's third-party works section, particularly the
requirement to ensure a license exists for each third-party work.
If the media was contributed directly to an ASF project, the contributor has the option to insert their copyright notice
in the NOTICE file, as is described for source files. If the media comes from a
third-party source (not contributed directly to the project), then any copyright notice that is obviously associated with
the media should be copied into the NOTICE file.
License headers allow someone examining the file to know the terms for the work, even when it is distributed without
the rest of the distribution. Without a licensing notice, it must be assumed that the author has reserved all rights,
including the right to copy, modify, and redistribute.
Does this policy apply to projects outside the ASF that use the Apache License?
No. This is strictly an ASF policy. Other projects using the Apache License should still refer to the
license's appendix for guidance on applying a header to their source files.