On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 8:55 PM, Prashant Shah <<a href="mailto:pshah.mumbai@gmail.com">pshah.mumbai@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>> I read the Apache License again specifically Definitions section - my<br>> evaluation was that it is counted as Contribution if the Derivative<br>
> Work is intentionally submitted to Licensor for inclusion in the<br>> original Work. Maybe I am wrong on this :)<br>><br>> ""Contribution" shall mean any work of authorship, including the<br>> original version of the Work and any modifications or additions to<br>
> that Work or Derivative Works thereof, that is intentionally submitted<br>> to Licensor for inclusion in the Work by the copyright owner or by an<br>> individual or Legal Entity authorized to submit on behalf of the<br>
> copyright owner."<br><br>I think your confusion here is that you're thinking of Licensor as a single person that never changes for a given work. There may in fact be many Licensors.<br><br>Realize that this definition says "including the <b>original version of the Work and</b>..."<br>
<br>Also note that Contributor was defined as:<br>"Contributor" shall mean <b>Licensor and</b> any individual or Legal Entity on behalf of whom a Contribution has been received by Licensor and subsequently incorporated within the Work.<br>
<br>(emphasis added by me)<br><br>If you modify the work, place the modifications under the ASL 2.0 and do not contribute it back to the project you become the Licensor for the modifications. Your modifications then become covered as the original version of the work for the portion you've placed under the ASL 2.0. Since the contributor is defined as the Licensor <b>and</b> people contributing modifications back to the Licensor (which is not the entity as the previous use of LIcensor in this sentence) the patent clause still applies.<br>
<br>If you make a modification, do not contribute it back to the Licensor, and do not place it under the ASL 2.0, then there is not patent grant. But you can't avoid the patent grant as long as you use the ASL 2.0.