diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'en/setup/licenses.html')
| -rw-r--r-- | en/setup/licenses.html | 110 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 110 deletions
diff --git a/en/setup/licenses.html b/en/setup/licenses.html deleted file mode 100644 index a2114a2b..00000000 --- a/en/setup/licenses.html +++ /dev/null @@ -1,110 +0,0 @@ -<html devsite> - <head> - <title>Content License</title> - <meta name="project_path" value="/_project.yaml" /> - <meta name="book_path" value="/_book.yaml" /> - </head> - <body> - <!-- - Copyright 2017 The Android Open Source Project - - Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License"); - you may not use this file except in compliance with the License. - You may obtain a copy of the License at - - http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 - - Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software - distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS, - WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied. - See the License for the specific language governing permissions and - limitations under the License. - --> - - - -<p>The Android Open Source Project uses a few -<a href="http://www.opensource.org/">open source initiative</a> -approved open source licenses for our software.</p> -<h2 id="android-open-source-project-license">Android Open Source Project License</h2> -<p>The preferred license for the Android Open Source Project is the -<a href="http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0">Apache -Software License, Version 2.0</a> ("Apache 2.0"), -and the majority of the Android software is licensed -with Apache 2.0. While the project will strive to adhere to the preferred -license, there may be exceptions that will be handled on a case-by-case -basis. For example, the Linux kernel patches are under the GPLv2 license with -system exceptions, which can be found on <a href="http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/COPYING">kernel.org</a>.</p> -<h2 id="contributor-license-grants">Contributor License Agreements</h2> -<p>All <em>individual</em> contributors (that is, contributors making contributions -only on their own behalf) of ideas, code, or documentation to the Android Open -Source Project will be required to complete, sign, and submit an <a -href="https://cla.developers.google.com/about/google-individual">Individual -Contributor License Agreement</a>. The agreement can be executed online through the -<a href="https://android-review.googlesource.com/#/settings/agreements">code review tool</a>. -The agreement clearly defines the terms under which intellectual -property has been contributed to the Android Open Source Project. This license -is for your protection as a contributor as well as the protection of the -project; it does not change your rights to use your own contributions for any -other purpose.</p> -<p>For a <em>corporation</em> (or other entity) that has assigned employees to -work on the Android Open Source Project, a <a -href="https://cla.developers.google.com/about/google-corporate">Corporate -Contributor License Agreement</a> is available. -This version of the agreement allows a -corporation to authorize contributions submitted by its designated employees -and to grant copyright and patent licenses. Note that a Corporate Contributor -License Agreement does not remove the need for any developer to sign their own -Individual Contributor License Agreement as an individual. The individual -agreement is needed to cover any of their contributions that are <em>not</em> -owned by the corporation signing the Corporate Contributor License Agreement.</p> -<p>Please note we based our agreements on the ones the -<a href="http://www.apache.org">Apache Software Foundation</a> uses, which can -be found on the <a href="http://www.apache.org/licenses/">Apache web site</a>.</p> -<h2 id="why-apache-software-license">Why Apache Software License?</h2> -<p>We are sometimes asked why Apache Software License 2.0 is the preferred -license for Android. For userspace (that is, non-kernel) software, we do in -fact prefer ASL2.0 (and similar licenses like BSD, MIT, etc.) over other -licenses such as LGPL.</p> -<p>Android is about freedom and choice. The purpose of Android is promote -openness in the mobile world, and we don't believe it's possible to predict or -dictate all the uses to which people will want to put our software. So, while -we encourage everyone to make devices that are open and modifiable, we don't -believe it is our place to force them to do so. Using LGPL libraries would -often force them to do just that.</p> -<p>Here are some of our specific concerns:</p> -<ul> -<li> -<p>LGPL (in simplified terms) requires either: shipping of source to the -application; a written offer for source; or linking the LGPL-ed library -dynamically and allowing users to manually upgrade or replace the library. -Since Android software is typically shipped in the form of a static system -image, complying with these requirements ends up restricting OEMs' designs. -(For instance, it's difficult for a user to replace a library on read-only -flash storage.)</p> -</li> -<li> -<p>LGPL requires allowance of customer modification and reverse -engineering for debugging those modifications. Most device makers do -not want to have to be bound by these terms. So to minimize the burden on -these companies, we minimize usage of LGPL software in userspace.</li></p> -</li> -<li> -<p>Historically, LGPL libraries have been the source of a large number -of compliance problems for downstream device makers and application -developers. Educating engineers on these issues is difficult and slow-going, -unfortunately. It's critical to Android's success that it be as easy as -possible for device makers to comply with the licenses. Given the -difficulties with complying with LGPL in the past, it is most prudent to -simply not use LGPL libraries if we can avoid it.</p> -</li> -</ul> -<p>The issues discussed above are our reasons for preferring ASL2.0 for -our own code. They aren't criticisms of LGPL or other licenses. We are -passionate about this topic, even to the point where we've gone out of our -way to make sure as much code as possible is ASL2.0 licensed. However, we love all free -and open source licenses, and respect others' opinions and preferences. We've -simply decided ASL2.0 is the right license for our goals.</p> - - </body> -</html> |