<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal">Hello all, this is my first attempt at posting something new so we’ll see how it goes.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Disney has been using a modified Apache license to release software. We have not yet sought OSI recognition of this modification. I’ve been hesitant to present this for consideration because the modifications are so minor. The concern
is that the Apache 2.0 is too ambiguous for our taste about trademark rights. The modified language is:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>Amending Apache license language & file headers. New text: Copyright 20XX <INSERT BUSINESS ENTITY>Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "Apache License")with the following modification; you may not use this file except
incompliance with the Apache License and the following modification to it: <o:p>
</o:p></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>Section 6. Trademarks. is deleted and replaced with:6. Trademarks. This License does not grant permission to use the tradenames, trademarks, service marks, or product names of the Licensor and its affiliates, except as required
to comply with Section 4(c) of the License and to reproduce the content of the NOTICE file. You may obtain a copy of the Apache License athttp://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
distributed under the Apache License with the above modification is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANYKIND, either express or implied. See the Apache License for the specific language governing permissions and
limitations under the Apache License.<o:p></o:p></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I would appreciate your thoughts. The distinction about trademarks is important to us, and should be to others who are concerned about losing control of their trademarks to “reasonable and customary” use allowed by Apache 2.0. Would a
license like this be a valuable enough distinction from Apache 2.0 to merit a separate license?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Stuart T. Langley<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>