diff --git a/config/nginx/default.conf b/config/nginx/default.conf
index e1b3f26e7d991ca364beb8e516ab5940fb89b1ee..1a4ba15afbc41c0c81252bdbd45ec6080b43bded 100644
--- a/config/nginx/default.conf
+++ b/config/nginx/default.conf
@@ -146,7 +146,7 @@ server {
# match index.php and all subpages of faq and redirect to /membership/
return 301 https://$host/membership/;
}
-
+
root /usr/share/nginx/html/;
index index.html index.htm;
}
diff --git a/content/legal/documents/eclipse-adoptium-marketplace-publisher-agreement.pdf b/content/legal/documents/eclipse-adoptium-marketplace-publisher-agreement.pdf
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..837d30aa78e78f1745c9cddd759c6f8a759c8cd6
Binary files /dev/null and b/content/legal/documents/eclipse-adoptium-marketplace-publisher-agreement.pdf differ
diff --git a/content/legal/documents/eclipse-foundation-branding-guidelines.pdf b/content/legal/documents/eclipse-foundation-branding-guidelines.pdf
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..81ed7c14783af4251bd6969d4bcf776a0a291114
Binary files /dev/null and b/content/legal/documents/eclipse-foundation-branding-guidelines.pdf differ
diff --git a/content/legal/documents/eclipse-openvsx-publisher-agreement.pdf b/content/legal/documents/eclipse-openvsx-publisher-agreement.pdf
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0e58828845ff5fe0d119effd6979fa0568925cc9
Binary files /dev/null and b/content/legal/documents/eclipse-openvsx-publisher-agreement.pdf differ
diff --git a/content/legal/documents/html/README_BEFORE_YOU_MAKE_CHANGES b/content/legal/documents/html/README_BEFORE_YOU_MAKE_CHANGES
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a8513d55839f3dfa6d34228b8109a5c290dfd4e6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/content/legal/documents/html/README_BEFORE_YOU_MAKE_CHANGES
@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
+The files in this directory are generated from AsciiDoc.
+
+DO NOT CHANGE THESE FILES DIRECTLY.
+
+The AsciiDoc source files are here:
+
+https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipsefdn/emo-team/policies/legal-faqs
+
+Make changes there, and run the build script.
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/content/legal/documents/html/committers-dd.html b/content/legal/documents/html/committers-dd.html
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d3fd21401c61bb331893bdcfa3e0ebf1f3ac3d69
--- /dev/null
+++ b/content/legal/documents/html/committers-dd.html
@@ -0,0 +1,217 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html>
+<html lang="en">
+<head>
+<meta charset="UTF-8">
+<!--[if IE]><meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=edge"><![endif]-->
+<meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0">
+<meta name="generator" content="Asciidoctor 1.5.6.1">
+<title>Eclipse Committer Due Diligence Guidelines</title>
+<style>
+
+</style>
+<link rel="stylesheet" href="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/font-awesome/4.6.3/css/font-awesome.min.css">
+</head>
+<body id="committers-dd" class="article toc2 toc-left">
+<div id="header">
+<h1>Eclipse Committer Due Diligence Guidelines</h1>
+<div id="toc" class="toc2">
+<div id="toctitle">Table of Contents</div>
+<ul class="sectlevel1">
+<li><a href="#introduction">Introduction</a></li>
+<li><a href="#contributors">Contributors and Committers</a>
+<ul class="sectlevel2">
+<li><a href="#content-received">How Content is Received</a></li>
+<li><a href="#content-distributed">How Content is Distributed</a></li>
+</ul>
+</li>
+<li><a href="#procedures">Due Diligence Procedures</a>
+<ul class="sectlevel2">
+<li><a href="#contributions">Receiving contributions</a></li>
+<li><a href="#appropriateness">Appropriateness of Contributions</a></li>
+<li><a href="#cryptography">Cryptography</a></li>
+<li><a href="#quality">Code Quality and Style</a></li>
+<li><a href="#legaldoc">Legal Documentation</a></li>
+<li><a href="#third-party">Third-Party Content</a></li>
+<li><a href="#tracking">Tracking Contributions</a></li>
+<li><a href="#summary">Summary</a></li>
+</ul>
+</li>
+</ul>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div id="content">
+<div class="sect1">
+<h2 id="introduction"><a class="anchor" href="#introduction"></a><a class="link" href="#introduction">Introduction</a></h2>
+<div class="sectionbody">
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Eclipse Committers play a very important role in the operation of the Eclipse Foundation open source projects. This document outlines the responsibilities and explains some of the basic concepts Eclipse Committers need to understand in their role as a committer. If you are an Eclipse Committer, should you have any questions after reading this document, your questions should be submitted to your Project Management Committee (PMC) or the Eclipse Management Organization (EMO).</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect1">
+<h2 id="contributors"><a class="anchor" href="#contributors"></a><a class="link" href="#contributors">Contributors and Committers</a></h2>
+<div class="sectionbody">
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Anyone who makes contributions to the Eclipse Foundation website and to Eclipse Foundation projects are considered to be Contributors. These Contributors submit contributions such as code, documentation, and other materials which must be received as <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/#resources-commit">Git commits</a> using infrastructure provided by the Eclipse Foundation.Contributors that have made significant contributions to Eclipse Foundation projects may be promoted to Committer status. A Contributor may become a Committer once having been nominated and voted in by other Committers. The appointment of a new Committer is subject to confirmation by the relevant PMC. Committers have a responsibility to help ensure that all content redistributed on the Eclipse Foundation servers is appropriate. In the case of mailing list posts and issue reports, it is possible for Contributors to submit inappropriate content without the knowledge of Committers. If a Committer finds content on one of these systems that does not seem appropriate, based on the standards set out in this document or based on the Committer’s good judgement and experience, they should contact the EMO or a PMC member immediately.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Committers receive write-access to Eclipse Foundation <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/#project-resources-and-services">resources and services</a>Â that contributors do not have. This includes write-access to the <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/#resources-git">source code repositories</a>, the <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/#resources-downloads">download servers</a>, and the <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/#resources-website">web site</a>. Committed content in the source code repository becomes immediately available to Eclipse Foundation visitors and users. More importantly, this content is used to create daily builds that may be downloaded by thousands of people each day and may be incorporated into many free and commercially-available software products. Due to the potential for downstream redistribution, Committers are required to help ensure that inappropriate content is not placed in the source code repository. Content contributed to the webpages on the Eclipse Foundation website are less likely to be incorporated into software products. However, by their nature, they may be seen by visitors to the web site and their impact is generally more immediate.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Committers are usually contributors as well. In addition to incorporating and releasing content contributed by others, Committers may commit (often significant) contributions which they have developed themselves. Some Committers may never commit any content other than what they have authored themselves. Even though they may be more confident in the pedigree of their own contributions, they still need to ensure that their content is appropriate.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="content-received"><a class="anchor" href="#content-received"></a><a class="link" href="#content-received">How Content is Received</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>All content must be received as Git commits via infrastructure provided by the Eclipse Foundation. All content submitted through any channel other than the Eclipse Foundation infrastructure must be approved by the PMC, and submitted to the EMO, via a <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/#ip-cq">Contribution Questionnaire</a> for due diligence approval, prior to being committed to the source code repository. It is highly recommended that each Committer review and understand Intellectual Property Management at the Eclipse Foundation and the Eclipse Foundation’s <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/#ip">Due Diligence Process</a> in particular.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="content-distributed"><a class="anchor" href="#content-distributed"></a><a class="link" href="#content-distributed">How Content is Distributed</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Users and recipients of content distributed by the Eclipse Foundation are granted rights to the content by the declared project license(s). The project license(s) are described on the each project’s website, the <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/#legaldoc-license">license</a> and <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/#legaldoc-notice">notice</a> files in the project’s software repositories, and in the <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/#ip-copyright-headers">copyright headers</a> of individual source files..</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect1">
+<h2 id="procedures"><a class="anchor" href="#procedures"></a><a class="link" href="#procedures">Due Diligence Procedures</a></h2>
+<div class="sectionbody">
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Please see this Eclipse Legal process <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/#ip">overview document</a>Â which provides a pictorial representation of the due diligence process.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="contributions"><a class="anchor" href="#contributions"></a><a class="link" href="#contributions">Receiving contributions</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>IMPORTANT NOTE: Committers should never accept a contribution received via a private communication such as email. It is important that all contributions are received through one of the channels described above to ensure that all necessary licenses are granted and that there is a public, timestamped, and archived record of the submission.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Before accepting every contribution, the Committer must check the following:</p>
+</div>
+<div class="olist arabic">
+<ol class="arabic">
+<li>
+<p>That the name and email address of the Contributors are accurately captured;</p>
+</li>
+<li>
+<p>That the Contributors have signed the  <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/legal/ECA.php">Eclipse Contributor Agreement</a> (ECA); and .</p>
+</li>
+<li>
+<p>That the Contributor has signed-off the Contribution, indicating that they are in compliance with the <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/legal/DCO.php">Developer Certificate of Origin</a>Â as defined in the ECA.</p>
+</li>
+</ol>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>It is the responsibility of the Committer to verify that there is a valid ECA on file for the author(s) of each contribution.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="appropriateness"><a class="anchor" href="#appropriateness"></a><a class="link" href="#appropriateness">Appropriateness of Contributions</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>A Committer cannot always assume that contributed content can be freely used or redistributed. Committers are obligated to ensure the appropriate due diligence has been completed before incorporating and redistributing content received from others. The process for performing due diligence depends on whether the contribution is deemed to be a "significant" one. A "significant" contribution is a substantial amount of code or content that introduces major new functionality into the code base, or any code or module which will be distributed under any license other than the project license(s).</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Any contribution greater than 1,000 lines of code is deemed to be "significant". If necessary, the EMO can assist in determining whether a contribution should be classified as "significant".</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>For "significant" contributions, the following three steps should be used in determining if the contributed content is suitable for committing to an Eclipse Foundation project,</p>
+</div>
+<div class="olist arabic">
+<ol class="arabic">
+<li>
+<p>The Committer, possibly with assistance from the Contributors, must complete the Eclipse Foundation <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/#ip-cq">Contribution Questionnaire</a>Â ("CQ").</p>
+</li>
+<li>
+<p>The PMC must approve of the content’s suitability for the Eclipse Foundation project, and indicate their approval on the CQ. The analysis performed by the PMC is usually one of a purely technical nature.</p>
+</li>
+<li>
+<p>The EMO must approve the contribution. This decision will be based upon the EMO’s due diligence review of the contribution’s content and licensing.</p>
+</li>
+</ol>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>For simple bug fixes and minor enhancements contributed under the <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/legal/epl/notice.php">Eclipse Foundation Terms of Use</a>, PMC and EMO approval is not required. However, the Committer is expected to ensure the appropriateness of the contribution and its availability for redistribution and modification by the Eclipse Foundation. There are many factors in making these determination, including things like license compatibility, confidentiality, copyright rights, patents, export control laws, no profanity, acceptable standards of code quality and coding style, etc. If a Committer has any concerns on these topics, they should seek assistance from the EMO.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>If the contribution has any "legal" terms or conditions associated with it whatsoever (other than a simple statement saying the contribution is licensed under the project license(s)) the contribution must be approved by the appropriate PMC before being utilized. Possible "legal" terms or conditions include anything referring to "copyright", "patent", "trade secret", "confidential", "license" or "rights," or any other language purporting to grant or reserve any rights to use or distribute the contribution, or limit public distribution of the contribution. The PMC (with assistance from the EMO as necessary) will determine if the "legal" language is consistent with the project license(s) as applicable.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Given the amount of time required to complete the due diligence process on these packages, the Committer should allow sufficient time for the appropriate review process to complete.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="cryptography"><a class="anchor" href="#cryptography"></a><a class="link" href="#cryptography">Cryptography</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>If the contribution is known or is believed to contain any type of encryption or decryption software, the contribution must be approved by the appropriate PMC before being utilized.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Cryptographic content from the Eclipse Foundation has been given a classification as Export Commodity Control Number (ECCN) 5D002.C.1 by the U.S. Government Department of Commerce, Bureau of Export Administration, and is deemed eligible for export under 15 CFR §742.15(b), and deemed not subject to Export Administration Regulations as publicly available encryption source code classified ECCN 5D002.. However, under this license exception, the content may not contain cryptanalytic functionality, such as a cryptographic codebreaker. It is the Committer’s obligation to ensure that the content does not contain functionality that would require a change in export classification. If you have any questions regarding cryptography or export controls, please contact <a href="mailto:license@eclipse.org">license@eclipse.org</a>.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Any modifications, additions or removal of cryptographic code, should be brought to the PMC’s attention.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Any Contributions containing Cryptography should have information regarding the Cryptography documented in <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/#legaldoc-notice">notices</a>Â for the source code repository and distribution forms that contain the Contribution. The Committer should work with the EMO to ensure the notices file has the appropriate documentation before the contribution is committed to the source code repository.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="quality"><a class="anchor" href="#quality"></a><a class="link" href="#quality">Code Quality and Style</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Each project may have its own standards for quality and style. However, any profanity found in the code or its comments are considered unacceptable and should be removed before the content is contributed. For more details on a specific project’s quality or style standards, please connect directly with the project team, or consult with the PMC.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="legaldoc"><a class="anchor" href="#legaldoc"></a><a class="link" href="#legaldoc">Legal Documentation</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>It is very important that all content contains the correct legal documentation. Please read the <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/#legaldoc">Legal Documentation Requirements</a>.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>If you require assistance in preparing any of this documentation, contact your PMC or the EMO. All legal documentation should be approved by the EMO prior to committing the content.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="third-party"><a class="anchor" href="#third-party"></a><a class="link" href="#third-party">Third-Party Content</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>There are cases where content redistributed at the Eclipse Foundation is not received as a contribution under the the project license(s). The most common case is a Committer who wishes to redistribute content maintained by another open source project, outside of the Eclipse Foundation. Some examples of such packages currently being redistributed by the Eclipse Foundation are projects maintained by <a href="http://www.apache.org/">The Apache Software Foundation</a>, <a href="http://www.mozilla.org/">Mozilla</a>, <a href="http://www.gtk.org/">GTK+</a>, <a href="http://www.junit.org/">JUnit</a>, <a href="http://www.jcraft.com/">JCraft</a>, and others.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Before any such package can be redistributed by the Eclipse Foundation, the Committer must create a <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/#ip-cq">Contribution Questionnaire</a>, providing details of the package to the EMO and the PMC. The package will then be reviewed as follows:</p>
+</div>
+<div class="ulist">
+<ul>
+<li>
+<p>The PMC will decide whether the package’s functionality is required, and approve it for use by the project,</p>
+</li>
+<li>
+<p>The EMO will decide on the compatibility of the contribution’s license with the project license(s), and</p>
+</li>
+<li>
+<p>The EMO will initiate the <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/#ip">IP due diligence review</a>.</p>
+</li>
+</ul>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="tracking"><a class="anchor" href="#tracking"></a><a class="link" href="#tracking">Tracking Contributions</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Tracking of each contribution within a project is very important from a legal point of view. As well, it allows for the appropriate acknowledgement of each contributor. This information about each contribution is typically maintained within <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/#resources-commit">Git commit records</a>, and the standard <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/#ip-copyright-headers">copyright headers</a>Â contained within individual source files.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Each project team must take steps to ensure that intellectual property is <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/#resources-commit">properly received</a>, so that it can be tracked by the automated <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/#ip-iplog">Intellectual Property Log</a>Â ("IP Log") infrastructure.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="summary"><a class="anchor" href="#summary"></a><a class="link" href="#summary">Summary</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>To help support downstream adoption of Eclipse Foundation projects, it is a necessity to exercise the appropriate due diligence. In addition to these specific standards, the community relies on Committers to exercise their own judgment with respect to other factors that may deem the contribution to be inappropriate for use. If a Committer has doubts about the appropriateness of the contribution for any reason, then that Committer should investigate and consult with the applicable PMC, who will call on or direct you to EMO resources if necessary.</p>
+</div>
+<hr>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Last updated: December 19/2017</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+</div>
+</div>
+</div>
+</body>
+</html>
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/content/legal/documents/html/epl-2.0-faq.html b/content/legal/documents/html/epl-2.0-faq.html
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..790f97dd7c22f1309ec0412cec66101e8971b0f8
--- /dev/null
+++ b/content/legal/documents/html/epl-2.0-faq.html
@@ -0,0 +1,647 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html>
+<html lang="en">
+<head>
+<meta charset="UTF-8">
+<!--[if IE]><meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=edge"><![endif]-->
+<meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0">
+<meta name="generator" content="Asciidoctor 1.5.6.1">
+<title>Eclipse Public License (EPL) Frequently Asked Questions</title>
+<style>
+
+</style>
+<link rel="stylesheet" href="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/font-awesome/4.6.3/css/font-awesome.min.css">
+</head>
+<body id="epl-faq" class="article toc2 toc-left">
+<div id="header">
+<h1>Eclipse Public License (EPL) Frequently Asked Questions</h1>
+<div id="toc" class="toc2">
+<div id="toctitle">Table of Contents</div>
+<ul class="sectlevel1">
+<li><a href="#epl-overview">1. Overview</a>
+<ul class="sectlevel2">
+<li><a href="#h.2487uaelxj1l">1.1. What is the latest version of the EPL?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.wswwmbk7gui7">1.2. What is the SPDX code for the Eclipse Public License, Version 2.0?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.hz76esowpykz">1.3. Why did the Eclipse Foundation create a new version of the EPL?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.a0eux401qus">1.4. What are the major changes between EPL-1.0 and EPL-2.0?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.60mjudroo8e5">1.5. Why should I Re-license from EPL-1.0 to EPL-2.0?</a></li>
+</ul>
+</li>
+<li><a href="#epl-secondary">2. Secondary License</a>
+<ul class="sectlevel2">
+<li><a href="#h.w1np1lrpht6k">2.1. Why was the concept of Secondary Licenses added to the EPL-2.0?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.it3upld1gcpe">2.2. What is the benefit of content to be available under EPL-2.0 with a Secondary License clause?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.lgjcpvoq08a9">2.3. Is EPL-2.0 with the Secondary License clause considered dual licensing?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.ofnb7ks8rr0y">2.4. Some organizations do not use GPL-licensed content. Will this impact the adoption of Eclipse projects licensed EPL-2.0 with the Secondary License clause?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.7hwnw6ty29pj">2.5. If an Eclipse Top Level Project (TLP) is licensed EPL-2.0 with the Secondary License clause, is this license a hard requirement for the sub projects of that TLP?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.nzy2s8vsuxe2">2.6. Should Eclipse Foundation dual licensed projects (EPL-1.0 OR EDL-1.0) re-license to EPL-2.0 with the Secondary License clause?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.nmhx2u70socl">2.7. I’m familiar with using code under the dual license of CDDL or GPL-2.0 with Classpath Exception. Is the use of EPL-2.0 with the Secondary License clause of GPL-2.0+ with Classpath Exception the same scenario?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.cyyo81gn4npa">2.8. Does the use of the EPL-2.0 with the Secondary License clause mean I can never remove the EPL-2.0 license?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.etxgak6rgdy1">2.9. If I use EPL-2.0 licensed content with the Secondary License clause specifying GPL-2.0+ with Classpath Exception and I combine the work with GPL with CE licensed content and make the content available under the GPL-2.0+ with CE only, is the EPL-2.0 license effectively removed and no longer applicable?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.8noir4xue973">2.10. Is there an advantage to this new primary/secondary approach vs a dual license approach?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.aofuc4dbllpj">2.11. Can I remove Exhibit A from the license text if I do not intend to enable a Secondary License?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.lza2unrion3b">2.12. Can I use other licenses as a Secondary License other than the GPL-2.0 or later?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.r4jspab0hx2c">2.13. How do I make my new project GPL compatible?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.yixdeq46521o">2.14. Does including a Secondary License(s) clause entitle an Eclipse Project to distribute third-party content licensed under the terms of that Secondary License?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.hsnsfg4e0htq">2.15. With EPL-2.0, would the optional GPL compatibility clause work for LGPL code as well?</a></li>
+</ul>
+</li>
+<li><a href="#epl-relicensing">3. Re-licensing</a>
+<ul class="sectlevel2">
+<li><a href="#h.tci84nlsqpgw">3.1. How Do I Re-license from EPL-1.0 to EPL-2.0?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.cktcxkzh8ks4">3.2. How to Re-license from EPL-1.0 to EPL-2.0 with Secondary License?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.tintzo3jnku1">3.3. What is the process for Eclipse Foundation projects to re-license to EPL-2.0 with Secondary License?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.q72cnghf29k0">3.4. What project documentation changes do I need to make after switching to the EPL-2.0 only with no Secondary License?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.aq5xwcjmpy2a">3.5. What project documentation changes do I need to make after switching to the EPL-2.0 with Secondary License?</a></li>
+</ul>
+</li>
+<li><a href="#epl-general">4. General Questions</a>
+<ul class="sectlevel2">
+<li><a href="#h.mz8pxljvc07w">4.1. Is my EPL-2.0 licensed project GPL compatible by default?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.gry4ochk5i85">4.2. Should EPL-1.0 projects accept contributions under EPL-2.0?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.qr04zt7270jy">4.3. Can I modify the EPL-2.0 License?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.rqhk20ygse0e">4.4. Is the EPL-2.0 better than EPL-1.0 for jurisdictions outside of the USA?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.tokw8l7u084o">4.5. Does EPL-2.0 change the scope of the copyleft?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.jpf1lpypxbyb">4.6. Did the patent license terms change?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.4tc4zmwxqcf6">4.7. Can I still use EPL-1.0?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.nye3xp5x2dce">4.8. Do all Eclipse Foundation members approve of the EPL?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.ctmhioag9rse">4.9. Is the EPL approved by the Open Source Initiative (OSI)?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.vtzs3trm64du">4.10. Is the EPL an approved Free Software Foundation License (FSF)?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.248ll7svxcyn">4.11. How are the parties defined in the EPL?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.973c2qv6zg27">4.12. Can a Contributor remain anonymous?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.u8ivm25hel7">4.13. What rights do Contributors grant Recipients under EPL?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.5ucozq4kvv7o">4.14. Does the EPL allow me to take the Source Code for a Program licensed under it and include all or part of it in another program licensed under the GNU General Public License (GPL), Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD) license or other Open Source license?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.fn86eyf5mvhs">4.15. Is my EPL-2.0 licensed project GPL compatible by default?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.obyumhvpl7gl">4.16. Can I take a Program licensed under the EPL, compile it without modification, and commercially license the result?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.u8dlu1sf2f98">4.17. If I take a Program licensed under the EPL, compile it without modification, and commercially license the result, do I need to include the source code with the object code distribution?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.n9g0wv1ltlut">4.18. When I incorporate a portion of a Program licensed under the EPL into my own proprietary product distributed in object code form, can I use a single license for the full product, in other words, covering the portion of the Program plus my own code?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.vaqoo586ejdj">4.19. The EPL states that it can only be changed by the Agreement Steward. Does a Contributor have the choice of redistributing a previously distributed Program under the old or the new version of the EPL?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.8upxunejvnvc">4.20. If I modify a Program licensed under the EPL, but never distribute it to anyone else, do I have to make my modifications available to others?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.2c51ohn0wg82">4.21. If I modify a Program licensed under the EPL and distribute the object code of the modified Program, must I make the source code available?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.xr574gmz4aly">4.22. If I write a module to add to a Program licensed under the EPL and distribute the object code of the module along with the rest of the Program, must I make the source code to my module available in accordance with the terms of the EPL?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.s5gxmwu1579y">4.23. Does the EPL offer any warranty with regard to the Program?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.gpf2fucdwyo4">4.24. I am starting my own open source software project. Does the Eclipse Foundation allow me to use the EPL for my project?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.kozlxbolal4y">4.25. What licenses are acceptable for third-party code redistributed by Eclipse projects?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.ny475e9r1v2u">4.26. Is an OSI-compliant license a requirement for all third-party code redistributed by Eclipse projects?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.sfzscklic49g">4.27. Are the Eclipse Public License (EPL) and the General Public License (GPL) compatible?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.30qunqoq5upx">4.28. How do I specify dual licensing in my file headers?</a></li>
+</ul>
+</li>
+<li><a href="#epl-derivative">5. Derivative Works</a>
+<ul class="sectlevel2">
+<li><a href="#h.fxtpdwpym0hx">5.1. Some open source software communities specify what they mean by a "derivative work". Does the Eclipse Foundation have a position on this?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.dywt3xhx2jg">5.2. Some free software communities say that linking to their code automatically means that your program is a derivative work. Is this the position of the Eclipse Foundation?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.wg4sdtz3fnc5">5.3. I’m programmer not a lawyer, can you give me a clear-cut example of when something is or is not a derivative work?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.xu4ooq8g5mx8">5.4. Many Eclipse tools and wizards use code templates which are included in the application that is generated. Is the code generated by these tools considered a derivative work that must be licensed under the EPL?</a></li>
+</ul>
+</li>
+</ul>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div id="content">
+<div id="preamble">
+<div class="sectionbody">
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>For informational purposes only.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>This FAQ attempts to provide answers to commonly asked questions related to the <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/legal/epl-2.0">Eclipse Public License (EPL)</a>. It is provided for informational purposes only. It is not part of, nor does it modify, amend, or supplement the terms of the EPL. The EPL is a legal agreement that governs the rights granted to material licensed under it, so please read it carefully. If there is any conflict between this FAQ and the EPL, the terms of the EPL shall govern. This FAQ should not be regarded as legal advice. If you need legal advice, you must contact your own lawyer.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect1">
+<h2 id="epl-overview"><a class="anchor" href="#epl-overview"></a><a class="link" href="#epl-overview">1. Overview</a></h2>
+<div class="sectionbody">
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.2487uaelxj1l"><a class="anchor" href="#h.2487uaelxj1l"></a><a class="link" href="#h.2487uaelxj1l">1.1. What is the latest version of the EPL?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Version 2.0 is the latest version of the Eclipse Public License</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.wswwmbk7gui7"><a class="anchor" href="#h.wswwmbk7gui7"></a><a class="link" href="#h.wswwmbk7gui7">1.2. What is the SPDX code for the Eclipse Public License, Version 2.0?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>EPL-2.0</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.hz76esowpykz"><a class="anchor" href="#h.hz76esowpykz"></a><a class="link" href="#h.hz76esowpykz">1.3. Why did the Eclipse Foundation create a new version of the EPL?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>The EPL-1.0 is very close to the Common Public License; and as such, its terms are essentially 16 years old. A lot of the motivation was to simply update the license to reflect the norms and expectations of an industry that has changed a lot in that time.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.a0eux401qus"><a class="anchor" href="#h.a0eux401qus"></a><a class="link" href="#h.a0eux401qus">1.4. What are the major changes between EPL-1.0 and EPL-2.0?</a></h3>
+<div class="ulist">
+<ul>
+<li>
+<p>The term of art is now referred to as "file" rather than "module";</p>
+</li>
+<li>
+<p>The choice of law provisions has been removed;</p>
+</li>
+<li>
+<p>The license is now suitable for scripting languages such as JavaScript; and</p>
+</li>
+<li>
+<p>The license now includes an option to add a secondary license for GPL-2.0+ compatibility.</p>
+</li>
+</ul>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.60mjudroo8e5"><a class="anchor" href="#h.60mjudroo8e5"></a><a class="link" href="#h.60mjudroo8e5">1.5. Why should I Re-license from EPL-1.0 to EPL-2.0?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>The EPL-1.0 has been deprecated; and in order to reduce license proliferation, the Eclipse open source project community will begin to migrate to the new EPL-2.0. Each Eclipse project will need to go through the process of updating their project license and license headers to specify EPL-2.0. Users and adopters of Eclipse projects should expect the next simultaneous release of each Eclipse project will be using EPL-2.0.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect1">
+<h2 id="epl-secondary"><a class="anchor" href="#epl-secondary"></a><a class="link" href="#epl-secondary">2. Secondary License</a></h2>
+<div class="sectionbody">
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.w1np1lrpht6k"><a class="anchor" href="#h.w1np1lrpht6k"></a><a class="link" href="#h.w1np1lrpht6k">2.1. Why was the concept of Secondary Licenses added to the EPL-2.0?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>A number of Eclipse projects require GPL compatibility. Previously, our solution to this was to dual-license projects under the EPL-1.0 and the BSD. However, this had the effect of eliminating the copyleft provisions which are the norm within the Eclipse community. As a result, this was a pragmatic approach to resolve this issue.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.it3upld1gcpe"><a class="anchor" href="#h.it3upld1gcpe"></a><a class="link" href="#h.it3upld1gcpe">2.2. What is the benefit of content to be available under EPL-2.0 with a Secondary License clause?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>The notion of Secondary Licenses is intended to permit combining content licensed under the EPL-2.0 with an otherwise incompatible license, specifically the GNU General Public License, v2.0 or greater. This means that the content that includes a Secondary License clause may be combined with content distributed under the terms of that Secondary License, and the combined content can be then be collectively distributed under the terms of that Secondary License.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>For example, content that is licensed under the EPL-2.0 with a GPL-2.0 Secondary License can be combined with content that is licensed under the GPL-2.0, and then distributed as combined work under the GPL-2.0.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Content that includes a Secondary License clause may link directly with content that is licensed under the terms of that Secondary License (and vice-versa, subject to the terms of the Secondary License).</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.lgjcpvoq08a9"><a class="anchor" href="#h.lgjcpvoq08a9"></a><a class="link" href="#h.lgjcpvoq08a9">2.3. Is EPL-2.0 with the Secondary License clause considered dual licensing?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>It is extremely close to dual licensing. The EPL-2.0 is the only license, until such time as it is combined and distributed with a work under the Secondary License. After such time, any recipient of the combined work can consider the content licensed under the Secondary License. The original work remains under the EPL-2.0 and is never really dual-licensed. Once a downstream adopter has received the content under the Secondary License, they can modify and further distribute it solely under the terms of the Secondary License.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>The EPL-2.0 file headers should remain on the source code content even if it has been made available under the Secondary License.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.ofnb7ks8rr0y"><a class="anchor" href="#h.ofnb7ks8rr0y"></a><a class="link" href="#h.ofnb7ks8rr0y">2.4. Some organizations do not use GPL-licensed content. Will this impact the adoption of Eclipse projects licensed EPL-2.0 with the Secondary License clause?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>While the EPL-2.0 has a concept called "Secondary Licenses" (which allows downstream adopters of projects which use the Secondary License clause to combine EPL-2.0 licensed code with GPL-licensed code and distribute the combination under the GPL), should an adopter not want to use the Secondary License (e.g. GPL-2.0 with Classpath Exception), then the entire construct can simply be ignored. The code can be consumed purely under the EPL-2.0 without any concerns.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>If the project does not use the Secondary License clause, then there is no issue.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.7hwnw6ty29pj"><a class="anchor" href="#h.7hwnw6ty29pj"></a><a class="link" href="#h.7hwnw6ty29pj">2.5. If an Eclipse Top Level Project (TLP) is licensed EPL-2.0 with the Secondary License clause, is this license a hard requirement for the sub projects of that TLP?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Charter statements specify the default licenses for the projects within the top-level project. Other license(s) can be used with the approval of the Project Management Committee (PMC) and in certain circumstances the Eclipse Board of Directors.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.nzy2s8vsuxe2"><a class="anchor" href="#h.nzy2s8vsuxe2"></a><a class="link" href="#h.nzy2s8vsuxe2">2.6. Should Eclipse Foundation dual licensed projects (EPL-1.0 OR EDL-1.0) re-license to EPL-2.0 with the Secondary License clause?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>If your project is currently using a dual licensing scheme involving the Eclipse Public License v1.0 and the Eclipse Distribution License v1.0 (which is BSD 3 Clause), you should consider relicensing to the Eclipse Public License v2.0 with a Secondary License in order to retain the copyleft provisions of the EPL. Note that because the BSD permits re-licensing, you would not need the explicit permission of the contributors to the project. This specific re-licensing can be decided and completed at the project team’s discretion. (Please see the Re-licensing FAQ section below for further details.)</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Each project must make its own determination of the costs and benefits of such a re-licensing.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.nmhx2u70socl"><a class="anchor" href="#h.nmhx2u70socl"></a><a class="link" href="#h.nmhx2u70socl">2.7. I’m familiar with using code under the dual license of CDDL or GPL-2.0 with Classpath Exception. Is the use of EPL-2.0 with the Secondary License clause of GPL-2.0+ with Classpath Exception the same scenario?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>While the EPL-2.0 is similar in many ways to the CDDL, what the Secondary License clause says is that if a downstream adopter wants to take the EPL-2.0 code and combine it with GPLv2+CE code and ship the resulting combined work under the GPLv2+CE they can do so. Someone who receives that combined work could conceivably then fork the code under the GPLv2+CE, however it would be our preference that modifications be contributed upstream to the original EPL-2.0 licensed project.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.cyyo81gn4npa"><a class="anchor" href="#h.cyyo81gn4npa"></a><a class="link" href="#h.cyyo81gn4npa">2.8. Does the use of the EPL-2.0 with the Secondary License clause mean I can never remove the EPL-2.0 license?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>If you receive a combined work which is distributed solely under the Secondary License, you may use, modify, and distribute that code under those Secondary License terms, rather than the EPL-2.0.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>However, it would be our preference that:</p>
+</div>
+<div class="ulist">
+<ul>
+<li>
+<p>modifications be contributed upstream to the original EPL-2.0 licensed project; and</p>
+</li>
+<li>
+<p>you not remove the EPL-2.0 file headers to maintain the origin of the code.</p>
+</li>
+</ul>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.etxgak6rgdy1"><a class="anchor" href="#h.etxgak6rgdy1"></a><a class="link" href="#h.etxgak6rgdy1">2.9. If I use EPL-2.0 licensed content with the Secondary License clause specifying GPL-2.0+ with Classpath Exception and I combine the work with GPL with CE licensed content and make the content available under the GPL-2.0+ with CE only, is the EPL-2.0 license effectively removed and no longer applicable?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>At this point the combination is licensed only under the GPL 2.0 with CE. The original content is still available under the EPL-2.0 with the Secondary License clause.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.8noir4xue973"><a class="anchor" href="#h.8noir4xue973"></a><a class="link" href="#h.8noir4xue973">2.10. Is there an advantage to this new primary/secondary approach vs a dual license approach?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Yes. The Secondary License approach provides the flexibility to use content licensed under the EPL-2.0 with a Secondary License clause in GPL-licensed projects while maintaining the original code base under the EPL-2.0. This does not prevent forks of the code base where it makes sense, but it does try to maintain license compatibility.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.aofuc4dbllpj"><a class="anchor" href="#h.aofuc4dbllpj"></a><a class="link" href="#h.aofuc4dbllpj">2.11. Can I remove Exhibit A from the license text if I do not intend to enable a Secondary License?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>No. Exhibit A forms part of the License Agreement and thus cannot be removed. Exhibit A is provided in order to allow the source code to be made available under a secondary license(s). The EPL-2.0 stipulates applicable secondary licenses are the GNU General Public License, Version 2.0, or any later versions of that license, including any exceptions or additional permissions as identified by the initial Contributor.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>If you do not wish to enable any Secondary Licenses for content that you create, then you can basically ignore the Exhibit A. If you do want to enable one or more Secondary Licenses, then you should include a copy of the notice statement in Exhibit A in your file header copyright notices, and/or any additional notices you provide to your downstream adopters.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.lza2unrion3b"><a class="anchor" href="#h.lza2unrion3b"></a><a class="link" href="#h.lza2unrion3b">2.12. Can I use other licenses as a Secondary License other than the GPL-2.0 or later?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>No. The provisions of the EPL-2.0 stipulates Secondary License "means either the GNU General Public License, Version 2.0, or any later versions of that license, including any exceptions or additional permissions as identified by the initial Contributor"</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.r4jspab0hx2c"><a class="anchor" href="#h.r4jspab0hx2c"></a><a class="link" href="#h.r4jspab0hx2c">2.13. How do I make my new project GPL compatible?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>You must re-license to EPL-2.0 adding GPL Compatibility as per Exhibit A.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.yixdeq46521o"><a class="anchor" href="#h.yixdeq46521o"></a><a class="link" href="#h.yixdeq46521o">2.14. Does including a Secondary License(s) clause entitle an Eclipse Project to distribute third-party content licensed under the terms of that Secondary License?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>No, the inclusion of a Secondary License clause does not permit you to distribute GPL licensed third-party content from Eclipse Foundation Projects. Please consult with the Eclipse Foundation IP team if your Eclipse Foundation project has a requirement for LGPL or GPL-licensed third-party content.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.hsnsfg4e0htq"><a class="anchor" href="#h.hsnsfg4e0htq"></a><a class="link" href="#h.hsnsfg4e0htq">2.15. With EPL-2.0, would the optional GPL compatibility clause work for LGPL code as well?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>No, it does not. The EPL and LGPL are already compatible licenses if we are talking about components and not cutting-and-pasting code. Our aversion to the LGPL is a business decision, not a legal one.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Should an Eclipse Foundation project have a strong and unavoidable requirement for an LGPL dependency, we can seek a Board exception.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect1">
+<h2 id="epl-relicensing"><a class="anchor" href="#epl-relicensing"></a><a class="link" href="#epl-relicensing">3. Re-licensing</a></h2>
+<div class="sectionbody">
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.tci84nlsqpgw"><a class="anchor" href="#h.tci84nlsqpgw"></a><a class="link" href="#h.tci84nlsqpgw">3.1. How Do I Re-license from EPL-1.0 to EPL-2.0?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>The EPL allows new versions of the license to be adopted by projects with little work. Specifically, the license states that, "Each new version of the Agreement will be given a distinguishing version number. The Program (including Contributions) may always be distributed subject to the version of the Agreement under which it was received. In addition, after a new version of the Agreement is published, Contributor may elect to distribute the Program (including its Contributions) under the new version."</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>For open source projects (including Eclipse Foundation projects) under the EPL-1.0 who wish to re-license to the EPL-2.0 they should do so by simply updating the file headers and notices. (Please see 3.4 and 3.5 below.) Note that it is good community practice to discuss this change on your public mailing lists, and to make every attempt to ensure that: (a) downstream users are aware of the change, and (b) that there is a rough consensus amongst the committers that this is the right time to switch.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>For those who distribute EPL-licensed code which they typically do not maintain themselves it may be onerous or counter-productive to update the file headers contained in the source code. Where the EPL-1.0 licensed content has not had its file headers updated to reflect the EPL-2.0, the licensee (contributor) may distribute the EPL-1.0 content under the EPL-2.0 by: (a) including a Notice File stating "the content is being distributed subject to the EPL-2.0 (see License File)" and (b) including the EPL-2.0 license text in the License File.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.cktcxkzh8ks4"><a class="anchor" href="#h.cktcxkzh8ks4"></a><a class="link" href="#h.cktcxkzh8ks4">3.2. How to Re-license from EPL-1.0 to EPL-2.0 with Secondary License?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>You must gain permission from all copyright holders to re-license the content</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.tintzo3jnku1"><a class="anchor" href="#h.tintzo3jnku1"></a><a class="link" href="#h.tintzo3jnku1">3.3. What is the process for Eclipse Foundation projects to re-license to EPL-2.0 with Secondary License?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Eclipse projects must ensure that all authors of contributions, including both committers and non-committer contributors, agree to re-license their work under the new terms. For those individuals whose contribution was made in the regular course of their employment by an Eclipse Member Organization, their respective employer has or will give consent on their behalf. Individual contributors, however, will need to give a personal authorization.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Projects must create a record in the project’s Bugzilla product with a description that very clearly states the nature of the change and explicitly request all copyright owners to explicitly approve the relicensing.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>For example:</p>
+</div>
+<div class="exampleblock">
+<div class="content">
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>The project team would like to re-license the existing project content under the Eclipse Public License version 2.0 with secondary license compatibility with the GNU General Public License version 2.0.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>The Eclipse Foundation must ensure that all authors of contributions, including both committers and non-committer contributors, agree to re-license their work under the new licensing scheme.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Content owners must express their agreement by providing a +1.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Note that every contributor (i.e. the authors of every commit) or their employer is a copyright holder. A single statement is required for an organization that holds copyrights via multiple authors.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>When every copyright holder has added their approval, send a note to <a href="mailto:license@eclipse.org">license@eclipse.org</a> to request review and final approval.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.q72cnghf29k0"><a class="anchor" href="#h.q72cnghf29k0"></a><a class="link" href="#h.q72cnghf29k0">3.4. What project documentation changes do I need to make after switching to the EPL-2.0 only with no Secondary License?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Update all file headers, about files and notice files. All references to the license must be updated to EPL-2.0. Replace occurrences of the SUA with the EPL-2.0 license text.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>File headers should follow this example:</p>
+</div>
+<div class="listingblock">
+<div class="title">Eclipse Public License 2.0 Copyright and License Header example</div>
+<div class="content">
+<pre class="highlight"><code>/*********************************************************************
+* Copyright (c) {date} {owner} [and others]
+*
+* This program and the accompanying materials are made
+* available under the terms of the Eclipse Public License 2.0
+* which is available at https://www.eclipse.org/legal/epl-2.0/
+*
+* SPDX-License-Identifier: EPL-2.0
+**********************************************************************/</code></pre>
+</div>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.aq5xwcjmpy2a"><a class="anchor" href="#h.aq5xwcjmpy2a"></a><a class="link" href="#h.aq5xwcjmpy2a">3.5. What project documentation changes do I need to make after switching to the EPL-2.0 with Secondary License?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Update all file headers, about files and notice files. All references to the license must be updated to EPL-2.0 including the Secondary License information as well. Replace occurrences of the SUA with the EPL-2.0 license text.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>File headers should follow this example.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="listingblock">
+<div class="title">Secondary License File Header example</div>
+<div class="content">
+<pre class="highlight"><code>********************************************************************************
+* Copyright (c) {date} {owner} [and others]
+*
+* This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the
+* terms of the Eclipse Public License 2.0 which is available at
+* http://www.eclipse.org/legal/epl-2.0.
+*
+* This Source Code may also be made available under the following Secondary
+* Licenses when the conditions for such availability set forth in the Eclipse
+* Public License, v. 2.0 are satisfied: GNU General Public License, version 2
+* with the GNU Classpath Exception which is
+* available at https://www.gnu.org/software/classpath/license.html.
+*
+* SPDX-License-Identifier: EPL-2.0 OR GPL-2.0 WITH Classpath-exception-2.0
+********************************************************************************/</code></pre>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>The first paragraph defines the basic terms. The second paragraph must be included to describe how secondary licenses apply. In this example, the GPL-2.0 with an exception applies. The generally-accepted names of the licenses and exceptions must be used.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Contact the EMO for assistance in crafting a non-obvious copyright and license header.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect1">
+<h2 id="epl-general"><a class="anchor" href="#epl-general"></a><a class="link" href="#epl-general">4. General Questions</a></h2>
+<div class="sectionbody">
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.mz8pxljvc07w"><a class="anchor" href="#h.mz8pxljvc07w"></a><a class="link" href="#h.mz8pxljvc07w">4.1. Is my EPL-2.0 licensed project GPL compatible by default?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>No. EPL-2.0 licensed projects may explicitly add GPL compatibility by way of adding a Secondary License as per <em>Exhibit A — Form of Secondary Licenses Notice</em>. See Section 3.2 of the EPL-2.0. Please note adding a secondary license is considered a relicensing exercise and all copyright holders must agree to the license change.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.gry4ochk5i85"><a class="anchor" href="#h.gry4ochk5i85"></a><a class="link" href="#h.gry4ochk5i85">4.2. Should EPL-1.0 projects accept contributions under EPL-2.0?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Since it is extremely easy to re-license from EPL-1.0 to EPL-2.0, we suggest projects remain under the EPL-1.0 until the project is ready to switch fully to EPL-2.0.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.qr04zt7270jy"><a class="anchor" href="#h.qr04zt7270jy"></a><a class="link" href="#h.qr04zt7270jy">4.3. Can I modify the EPL-2.0 License?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>No. Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute copies of the Agreement; however, in order to avoid inconsistency, the agreement is copyrighted and may only be modified by the Agreement Steward who reserves the right to publish new versions (including revisions) of this Agreement from time to time. No one other than the Agreement Steward has the right to modify the Agreement.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.rqhk20ygse0e"><a class="anchor" href="#h.rqhk20ygse0e"></a><a class="link" href="#h.rqhk20ygse0e">4.4. Is the EPL-2.0 better than EPL-1.0 for jurisdictions outside of the USA?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>The EPL-2.0 removes all mention of venue and choice of law.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.tokw8l7u084o"><a class="anchor" href="#h.tokw8l7u084o"></a><a class="link" href="#h.tokw8l7u084o">4.5. Does EPL-2.0 change the scope of the copyleft?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>The EPL-2.0 continues to be a weak copyleft license. In its simplest terms, that means that if you have modified EPL-2.0 licensed source code and you distribute that code or binaries built from that code outside your company, you must make the source code available under the EPL-2.0.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.jpf1lpypxbyb"><a class="anchor" href="#h.jpf1lpypxbyb"></a><a class="link" href="#h.jpf1lpypxbyb">4.6. Did the patent license terms change?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>No.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.4tc4zmwxqcf6"><a class="anchor" href="#h.4tc4zmwxqcf6"></a><a class="link" href="#h.4tc4zmwxqcf6">4.7. Can I still use EPL-1.0?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Yes. However, the version has been deprecated and in order to reduce license proliferation, we suggest that new projects consider adopting the EPL-2.0.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.nye3xp5x2dce"><a class="anchor" href="#h.nye3xp5x2dce"></a><a class="link" href="#h.nye3xp5x2dce">4.8. Do all Eclipse Foundation members approve of the EPL?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Yes, the Eclipse Foundation Board of Directors unanimously approved the new version of the EPL. Future members must agree to abide by the EPL and the Intellectual Property Policy as part of joining the Eclipse Foundation and signing the <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/org/documents/Eclipse%2520MEMBERSHIP%2520AGMT%25202003_11_10%2520Final.pdf">Eclipse Foundation Membership Agreement</a>.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.ctmhioag9rse"><a class="anchor" href="#h.ctmhioag9rse"></a><a class="link" href="#h.ctmhioag9rse">4.9. Is the EPL approved by the Open Source Initiative (OSI)?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Yes, the EPL has been approved. Version 2.0 was approved in August 2017. See the complete <a href="http://opensource.org/licenses/">list of OSI-approved licenses</a>.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.vtzs3trm64du"><a class="anchor" href="#h.vtzs3trm64du"></a><a class="link" href="#h.vtzs3trm64du">4.10. Is the EPL an approved Free Software Foundation License (FSF)?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Yes, the EPL-2.0 has been added to the official license list of the Free Software Foundation. While the FSF still considers the EPL-2.0 incompatible with the GPL, it recognizes the EPL-2.0 with Secondary License explicitly offers the option of designating content available under the GNU GPL version 2 or later. See the complete list of <a href="https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html">FSF Licenses</a>.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.248ll7svxcyn"><a class="anchor" href="#h.248ll7svxcyn"></a><a class="link" href="#h.248ll7svxcyn">4.11. How are the parties defined in the EPL?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>There are two types of parties to the EPL. They are "Contributors" and "Recipients." Contributors include an initial Contributor, who is the person or entity that creates the initial code distributed under the EPL, and subsequent Contributors, who originate changes or additions to the code (the combination referred to as the "Program"). Any person or entity that redistributes the Program is also a Contributor. Recipients include anyone who receives the Program under the EPL, including Contributors.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.973c2qv6zg27"><a class="anchor" href="#h.973c2qv6zg27"></a><a class="link" href="#h.973c2qv6zg27">4.12. Can a Contributor remain anonymous?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>No. Except for those who simply redistribute the Program, each Contributor must identify itself as the originator of its Contribution in a way that later Recipients will be able to readily see.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.u8ivm25hel7"><a class="anchor" href="#h.u8ivm25hel7"></a><a class="link" href="#h.u8ivm25hel7">4.13. What rights do Contributors grant Recipients under EPL?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Contributors license Recipients under the rights that they have in their Contributions.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.5ucozq4kvv7o"><a class="anchor" href="#h.5ucozq4kvv7o"></a><a class="link" href="#h.5ucozq4kvv7o">4.14. Does the EPL allow me to take the Source Code for a Program licensed under it and include all or part of it in another program licensed under the GNU General Public License (GPL), Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD) license or other Open Source license?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>No. Only the owner of software can decide whether and how to license it to others. Contributors to a Program licensed under the EPL understand that source code for the Program will be made available under the terms of the EPL. Unless you are the owner of the software or have received permission from the owner, you are not authorized to apply the terms of another license to the Program by including it in a program licensed under another Open Source license.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>However, if the content has been made available under the EPL-2.0 with Secondary License, the content may be distributed under the terms of that Secondary License while maintaining the original code base under the EPL-2.0.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.fn86eyf5mvhs"><a class="anchor" href="#h.fn86eyf5mvhs"></a><a class="link" href="#h.fn86eyf5mvhs">4.15. Is my EPL-2.0 licensed project GPL compatible by default?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>No. EPL-2.0 licensed projects may explicitly add GPL compatibility by way of adding a Secondary License as per <em>Exhibit A — Form of Secondary Licenses Notice</em>. See Section 3.2 of the EPL-2.0. Please note adding a secondary license is considered a relicensing exercise and all copyright holders must agree to the license change.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.obyumhvpl7gl"><a class="anchor" href="#h.obyumhvpl7gl"></a><a class="link" href="#h.obyumhvpl7gl">4.16. Can I take a Program licensed under the EPL, compile it without modification, and commercially license the result?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Yes. You may compile a Program licensed under the EPL without modification and commercially license the result in accordance with the terms of the EPL.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.u8dlu1sf2f98"><a class="anchor" href="#h.u8dlu1sf2f98"></a><a class="link" href="#h.u8dlu1sf2f98">4.17. If I take a Program licensed under the EPL, compile it without modification, and commercially license the result, do I need to include the source code with the object code distribution?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>No. But you do need to include a statement indicating where the source code is available and information on how to obtain it. The source code may be provided by you, or you may choose to provide a reference to where the source code originated from, such as the correct repository hosted at git.eclipse.org.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.n9g0wv1ltlut"><a class="anchor" href="#h.n9g0wv1ltlut"></a><a class="link" href="#h.n9g0wv1ltlut">4.18. When I incorporate a portion of a Program licensed under the EPL into my own proprietary product distributed in object code form, can I use a single license for the full product, in other words, covering the portion of the Program plus my own code?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Yes. The object code for the product may be distributed under a single license as long as it references the EPL portion and complies, for that portion, with the terms of the EPL.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.vaqoo586ejdj"><a class="anchor" href="#h.vaqoo586ejdj"></a><a class="link" href="#h.vaqoo586ejdj">4.19. The EPL states that it can only be changed by the Agreement Steward. Does a Contributor have the choice of redistributing a previously distributed Program under the old or the new version of the EPL?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>While Contributions are licensed under the version of the License under which they are originally distributed, the EPL provides for the ability of any Contributor to choose between that version or a later version.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.8upxunejvnvc"><a class="anchor" href="#h.8upxunejvnvc"></a><a class="link" href="#h.8upxunejvnvc">4.20. If I modify a Program licensed under the EPL, but never distribute it to anyone else, do I have to make my modifications available to others?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>No. If you do not distribute the modified Program, you do not have to make your modifications available to others.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.2c51ohn0wg82"><a class="anchor" href="#h.2c51ohn0wg82"></a><a class="link" href="#h.2c51ohn0wg82">4.21. If I modify a Program licensed under the EPL and distribute the object code of the modified Program, must I make the source code available?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Yes. By distributing the modified Program, even if it is only a free version of the object code, you are obligated to make the source code to the modified Program available to others.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.xr574gmz4aly"><a class="anchor" href="#h.xr574gmz4aly"></a><a class="link" href="#h.xr574gmz4aly">4.22. If I write a module to add to a Program licensed under the EPL and distribute the object code of the module along with the rest of the Program, must I make the source code to my module available in accordance with the terms of the EPL?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>No, as long as the module is not a Modified Work of the Program.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.s5gxmwu1579y"><a class="anchor" href="#h.s5gxmwu1579y"></a><a class="link" href="#h.s5gxmwu1579y">4.23. Does the EPL offer any warranty with regard to the Program?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>No. The Program released under the EPL is provided on an "as is" basis, without warranties or conditions of any kind.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.gpf2fucdwyo4"><a class="anchor" href="#h.gpf2fucdwyo4"></a><a class="link" href="#h.gpf2fucdwyo4">4.24. I am starting my own open source software project. Does the Eclipse Foundation allow me to use the EPL for my project?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Yes. The EPL is an OSI-approved open source license and may be used unaltered by projects regardless of where they are hosted.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.kozlxbolal4y"><a class="anchor" href="#h.kozlxbolal4y"></a><a class="link" href="#h.kozlxbolal4y">4.25. What licenses are acceptable for third-party code redistributed by Eclipse projects?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Eclipse views license compatibility through the lens of enabling successful commercial adoption of Eclipse technology in software products and services. We wish to create a commercial ecosystem based on the redistribution of Eclipse software technologies in commercially licensed software products. Determining whether a license for third-party code is acceptable often requires the input and advice of Eclipse’s legal advisors.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Please see our <a href="http://www.eclipse.org/legal/licenses.php">list of the most common licenses</a> approved for use by third-party code redistributed by Eclipse Foundation Projects. This list is not exhaustive. If you have any questions, please contact mailto:license@eclipse.org.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.ny475e9r1v2u"><a class="anchor" href="#h.ny475e9r1v2u"></a><a class="link" href="#h.ny475e9r1v2u">4.26. Is an OSI-compliant license a requirement for all third-party code redistributed by Eclipse projects?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Eclipse fully supports the Open Source Initiative’s certification of open source licenses, and the Eclipse Public License is certified as such. However, there are licenses for software content which meet Eclipse’s requirements for compatibility with the EPL and downstream commercial re-distribution that are not OSI certified, and Eclipse projects may make use of such licenses after review and approval by the Eclipse Foundation.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>The reverse is also true: there are OSI-compliant licenses are not compatible with the EPL or do not permit downstream commercial re-distribution. Such licenses are not used by Eclipse projects.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.sfzscklic49g"><a class="anchor" href="#h.sfzscklic49g"></a><a class="link" href="#h.sfzscklic49g">4.27. Are the Eclipse Public License (EPL) and the General Public License (GPL) compatible?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Unless a Secondary License has been specified in the EPL-2.0, the EPL and the GPL are not compatible in any combination where the result would be considered either: (a) a <em>derivative work</em> (which Eclipse interprets consistent with the definition of that term in the U.S. Copyright Act ) or (b) a work <em>based on</em> the GPL code, as that phrase is used in the <a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.html">GPLv2</a>, <a href="http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl.html">GPLv3</a> or the <a href="http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl-faq.html">GPL FAQ</a> as applicable. Further, you may not combine EPL and GPL code in any scenario where source code under those licenses are both the same source code module.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Based upon the <a href="http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/">position</a> of the Free Software Foundation, you may not combine EPL and GPL code in any scenario where linking exists between code made available under those licenses. The above applies to both GPL version 2 and GPL version 3.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.30qunqoq5upx"><a class="anchor" href="#h.30qunqoq5upx"></a><a class="link" href="#h.30qunqoq5upx">4.28. How do I specify dual licensing in my file headers?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Dual licensing should be specified by listing the license names and URLs, using inclusive disjunction ("or") to indicate choice from the consumer’s perspective (i.e. the consumer can choose to accept the content under one license or the other) as in the example below.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="listingblock">
+<div class="title">Dual licensing file header example.</div>
+<div class="content">
+<pre class="highlight"><code>/********************************************************************************
+ * Copyright (c) {date} {owner}[and others]
+ *
+ * This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the
+ * terms of the Eclipse Public License 2.0 which is available at
+ * http://www.eclipse.org/legal/epl-2.0, or the Apache License, Version 2.0
+ * which is available at https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.
+ *
+ * SPDX-License-Identifier: EPL-2.0 OR Apache-2.0
+ ********************************************************************************/</code></pre>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>In the past, our projects have used a conjunctive "and" from the creator’s perspective (i.e. the creator makes the content available under both licenses). Unless explicitly stated otherwise, content that uses "and" should be interpreted as equivalent in meaning to inclusive disjunction.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect1">
+<h2 id="epl-derivative"><a class="anchor" href="#epl-derivative"></a><a class="link" href="#epl-derivative">5. Derivative Works</a></h2>
+<div class="sectionbody">
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.fxtpdwpym0hx"><a class="anchor" href="#h.fxtpdwpym0hx"></a><a class="link" href="#h.fxtpdwpym0hx">5.1. Some open source software communities specify what they mean by a "derivative work". Does the Eclipse Foundation have a position on this?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>As described in section 1 of the Eclipse Public License,</p>
+</div>
+<div class="quoteblock">
+<blockquote>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>"Derivative Works" shall mean any work, whether in Source Code or other form, that is based on (or derived from) the Program and for which the editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications represent, as a whole, an original work of authorship.</p>
+</div>
+</blockquote>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>The Eclipse Foundation interprets the term "derivative work" in a way that is consistent with the definition in the U.S. Copyright Act, as applicable to computer software. You will need to seek the advice of your own legal counsel in deciding whether your program constitutes a derivative work.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.dywt3xhx2jg"><a class="anchor" href="#h.dywt3xhx2jg"></a><a class="link" href="#h.dywt3xhx2jg">5.2. Some free software communities say that linking to their code automatically means that your program is a derivative work. Is this the position of the Eclipse Foundation?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>No, the Eclipse Foundation interprets the term "derivative work" in a way that is consistent with the definition in the U.S. Copyright Act, as applicable to computer software. Therefore, linking to Eclipse code might or might not create a derivative work, depending on all of the other facts and circumstances.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.wg4sdtz3fnc5"><a class="anchor" href="#h.wg4sdtz3fnc5"></a><a class="link" href="#h.wg4sdtz3fnc5">5.3. I’m programmer not a lawyer, can you give me a clear-cut example of when something is or is not a derivative work?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>If you have made a copy of existing Eclipse code and made a few minor revisions to it, that is a derivative work. If you’ve written your own Eclipse Platform plug-in with 100% your own code to implement functionality not currently in Eclipse, then it is not a derivative work. Scenarios between those two extremes will require you to seek the advice of your own legal counsel in deciding whether your program constitutes a derivative work.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>For clarity, merely interfacing or interoperating with Eclipse Platform plug-in APIs (without modification) does not make an Eclipse Platform plug-in a derivative work.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.xu4ooq8g5mx8"><a class="anchor" href="#h.xu4ooq8g5mx8"></a><a class="link" href="#h.xu4ooq8g5mx8">5.4. Many Eclipse tools and wizards use code templates which are included in the application that is generated. Is the code generated by these tools considered a derivative work that must be licensed under the EPL?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Unfortunately, there is no clear answer to this question. To the extent that the code generated by a wizard is purely functional in nature and therefore not the proper subject matter for copyright protection, it could be argued that it is not subject to copyright protection, and therefore is not a derivative work. An example of that type of code would include calls to APIs or other technical instructions which are dictated by functional or technical requirements. Moreover, to the extent the generated code is a very small part of the final overall work, there is an argument that such use would be di minimis, and the final product or application should not be considered to be a derivative work. Finally, to the extent developers who use the generated code make many changes and additions to the code, there is also an argument that the resultant application is not a derivative work. Of course, these are just arguments and not "bright line" tests, and therefore each position could be subject to differing viewpoints. Eclipse cannot take a position on this issue, as it will ultimately be a question of the facts and circumstances associated with a particular use.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+</div>
+</div>
+</div>
+</body>
+</html>
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/content/legal/documents/html/legalfaq.html b/content/legal/documents/html/legalfaq.html
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..149fabbe5e4d9e2c7b74e2a24b46b0ffc571fcef
--- /dev/null
+++ b/content/legal/documents/html/legalfaq.html
@@ -0,0 +1,324 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html>
+<html lang="en">
+<head>
+<meta charset="UTF-8">
+<!--[if IE]><meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=edge"><![endif]-->
+<meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0">
+<meta name="generator" content="Asciidoctor 1.5.6.1">
+<title>Eclipse Foundation Legal Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)</title>
+<style>
+
+</style>
+<link rel="stylesheet" href="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/font-awesome/4.6.3/css/font-awesome.min.css">
+</head>
+<body id="h.mkk9i18tsofa" class="article toc2 toc-left">
+<div id="header">
+<h1>Eclipse Foundation Legal Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)</h1>
+<div id="toc" class="toc2">
+<div id="toctitle">Table of Contents</div>
+<ul class="sectlevel1">
+<li><a href="#overview">Overview</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.nh8z9duojqz0">Use and Redistribution of Content</a>
+<ul class="sectlevel2">
+<li><a href="#h.skv48lga3op6">Does the Eclipse Foundation own the content that it distributes?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.w7mgx29366h6">What is the Eclipse Foundation Software User Agreement?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.qfp99yh9nfdc">How do projects convey licensing and related information?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.6oemzrr7vtzh">Why are there other notices referenced in the Eclipse Foundation Software User Agreement?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.fzvxw8u5p8jr">What is the Eclipse Public License (EPL)?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.wxfu8ynj36kj">Why is the Eclipse Public License (EPL) used to license most of the content made available by the Eclipse Foundation?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.8hw4xp7chejr">What other licenses (besides the Eclipse Public License) may be used by Eclipse Open Source Projects?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.9dhzr9lvkqh8">Why does the Eclipse Foundation redistribute some content under licenses other than the Eclipse Public License?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.rnnp3o5bxq5">What licenses are acceptable for third-party content redistributed by Eclipse projects?        </a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.r2y1yck33rg4">I see copyright notices from IBM and/or other companies. How can it be open source software if it is copyright IBM?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#version">Which version of the Eclipse Public License does the Eclipse Foundation use?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.25gqlkbku1u9">Does the Eclipse Foundation have a patent policy?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.1legecavy5xx">May I please have a quote or see a price list for Eclipse software?</a></li>
+</ul>
+</li>
+<li><a href="#h.2gex0eipl1id">Contributions and Participation</a>
+<ul class="sectlevel2">
+<li><a href="#h.reim5nd6ep3m">What agreement covers contributions I submit to an Eclipse Foundation project?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.26hpwm6wrcbu">Will Eclipse projects accept contributions to content that were not provided under the project license?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.l3bvwrmty0iz">What if I have legal questions about my contribution to the Eclipse Foundation?</a></li>
+</ul>
+</li>
+<li><a href="#h.dris33ugmjs">Working as a Committer</a>
+<ul class="sectlevel2">
+<li><a href="#h.egfvt1pcqyla">What are my obligations as a committer working on an Eclipse Foundation project?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.dw2jc7fvtv5t">What is the due diligence that a committer must perform?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.ifqjlo6ueqc7">What if I have legal questions when I am performing due diligence as a committer?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.x0s5sxj1z2cp">Do I have to place copyright notices in all my code?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.tq9t96dkfm2y">If I change employers, what happens to my committer status at Eclipse?</a></li>
+</ul>
+</li>
+<li><a href="#h.qu58e71q3dbc">Cryptography</a>
+<ul class="sectlevel2">
+<li><a href="#h.xqxr6abpyq6y">Does software made available by the Eclipse Foundation contain cryptography?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#h.skw921k3c85n">Why is cryptography discussed in notices?</a></li>
+</ul>
+</li>
+</ul>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div id="content">
+<div class="sect1">
+<h2 id="overview"><a class="anchor" href="#overview"></a><a class="link" href="#overview">Overview</a></h2>
+<div class="sectionbody">
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>The following FAQ answers questions regarding legal issues related to Eclipse Projects, covering such topics as:</p>
+</div>
+<div class="ulist">
+<ul>
+<li>
+<p>licensing of materials made available by the Eclipse Foundation;</p>
+</li>
+<li>
+<p>contributions submitted to the Eclipse Foundation;</p>
+</li>
+<li>
+<p>working as a committer on Eclipse projects; and</p>
+</li>
+<li>
+<p>cryptography in software made available by the Eclipse Foundation</p>
+</li>
+</ul>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>If you intend to use, modify, and/or redistribute materials made available by the Eclipse Foundation, you may find this FAQ useful.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>This FAQ is provided for informational purposes only. It is not part of, nor does it modify, amend, or supplement the terms of licenses, or any other legal agreement. If there is any conflict between this FAQ and a legal agreement discussed herein, the terms of the discussed legal agreement shall govern. This FAQ should not be regarded as legal advice. If you need legal advice, you must contact your own lawyer.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>If you have a question that you would like to see answered in this FAQ, please send e-mail to the Eclipse Licensing alias (<a href="mailto:license@eclipse.org">license@eclipse.org</a>).</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect1">
+<h2 id="h.nh8z9duojqz0"><a class="anchor" href="#h.nh8z9duojqz0"></a><a class="link" href="#h.nh8z9duojqz0">Use and Redistribution of Content</a></h2>
+<div class="sectionbody">
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.skv48lga3op6"><a class="anchor" href="#h.skv48lga3op6"></a><a class="link" href="#h.skv48lga3op6">Does the Eclipse Foundation own the content that it distributes?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>No. All of the materials distributed by the Eclipse Foundation are owned by their respective copyright holders. Eclipse Foundation projects use what is sometimes referred to as “symmetrical inbound/outbound licensingâ€, which means that contributions are accepted under the same license that they are distributed under. As a result, the Eclipse Foundation itself does not have any particular ownership or licensing stake in the materials it distributes.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.w7mgx29366h6"><a class="anchor" href="#h.w7mgx29366h6"></a><a class="link" href="#h.w7mgx29366h6">What is the Eclipse Foundation Software User Agreement?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>The <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/legal/epl/notice.php#">Eclipse Foundation Software User Agreement</a>Â is an umbrella agreement that covers the use and distribution of materials made available by Eclipse Projects as Plug-ins and Features for the Eclipse Platform.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>The Eclipse Foundation Software User Agreement itself does not provide any usage or redistribution rights but instead references the EPL and other notices that grant you rights to the related content.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.qfp99yh9nfdc"><a class="anchor" href="#h.qfp99yh9nfdc"></a><a class="link" href="#h.qfp99yh9nfdc">How do projects convey licensing and related information?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Eclipse projects convey licensing information via <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/#legaldoc-license">license</a>Â and <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/#legaldoc-notice">notice</a>Â files. A license file, typically named LICENSE, contain the exact text of the project license(s) and are located in the root of source code repositories and in the distribution content. Notices files, typically named NOTICE, contain information about the project license(s), how they are combined, copyright holders, cryptography, and other project metadata.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>For Eclipse Platform Plug-ins, notices are represented in an about.html file.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.6oemzrr7vtzh"><a class="anchor" href="#h.6oemzrr7vtzh"></a><a class="link" href="#h.6oemzrr7vtzh">Why are there other notices referenced in the Eclipse Foundation Software User Agreement?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>The <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/legal/epl/notice.php#">Eclipse Foundation Software User Agreement</a>Â defines Abouts, Feature Licenses, and Feature Update Licenses. Some or all of these notices may be present in content (generally only for Eclipse Platform Plug-ins and Features) made available by the Eclipse Foundation. This framework of other notices is used for a number of reasons:</p>
+</div>
+<div class="ulist">
+<ul>
+<li>
+<p>Content made available by the Eclipse Foundation is constantly changing as that is the nature of open source development. These other notices allow licenses and other legal information to be changed as the content changes, without having to constantly revise the Software User Agreement. Think of them as plug-ins to the Software User Agreement.</p>
+</li>
+<li>
+<p>Sometimes content obtained from Eclipse Foundation may contain portions that are made available under other licenses. These other notices may be used to specifically address the licensing (and other issues) related to portions of content.</p>
+</li>
+<li>
+<p>Since much of the software made available by the Eclipse Foundation is designed to be extendible or to extend software such as Eclipse Platform, legal notices from multiple sources may be able to coexist in a consistent manner.</p>
+</li>
+<li>
+<p>Although the Eclipse Foundation makes software available as downloads, you can usually obtain all or some of the software by accessing the Eclipse Foundation source code repository. These other notices are used to ensure that licenses and other important information are available no matter how the software is obtained.</p>
+</li>
+</ul>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.fzvxw8u5p8jr"><a class="anchor" href="#h.fzvxw8u5p8jr"></a><a class="link" href="#h.fzvxw8u5p8jr">What is the Eclipse Public License (EPL)?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>The <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/legal/epl-2.0#">Eclipse Public License (EPL)</a>Â is an open source license that has been approved by the <a href="http://www.opensource.org/licenses/#">Open Source Initiative</a>.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.wxfu8ynj36kj"><a class="anchor" href="#h.wxfu8ynj36kj"></a><a class="link" href="#h.wxfu8ynj36kj">Why is the Eclipse Public License (EPL) used to license most of the content made available by the Eclipse Foundation?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>The terms and conditions of the EPL were crafted to be most appropriate for the Eclipse Foundation. Software made available by the Eclipse Foundation is used by developers who want to freely plug into and extend or alter the content. The EPL goes to great lengths to support and encourage the collaborative open source development of the content, while maximizing the ability to use and/or integrate the content with software licensed under other licenses, including many commercial licenses. Since the Eclipse Foundation seeks to encourage developers of both open source and proprietary development tools to embrace the content, this flexibility is critical.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.8hw4xp7chejr"><a class="anchor" href="#h.8hw4xp7chejr"></a><a class="link" href="#h.8hw4xp7chejr">What other licenses (besides the Eclipse Public License) may be used by Eclipse Open Source Projects?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Eclipse Projects have a Declared License that applies to content developed and maintained by the project team (“Project Codeâ€). Most Eclipse projects use the Eclipse Public License (EPL) as their Declared License, but other licenses (e.g. the Apache Software License 2.0) can be used. All Eclipse Projects exist under the umbrella of a <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/projects/dev_process/#4_Structure_and_Organization">Top-Level Project</a>, each of which specifies one or more permissible licensing schemes. Any licensing scheme other than what is specified by a Top-Level Project must be approved by the Eclipse Board of Directors.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Eclipse Projects may also distribute third party content under different licenses (which are compatible with the project license). The <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/legal/licenses.php#">Third Party Content Licenses</a> page provides a list of the most common licenses approved for use by third party content redistributed by Eclipse Foundation Projects. Queries regarding a specific license, should be directed to Eclipse Licensing (<a href="mailto:license@eclipse.org">license@eclipse.org</a>).</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p><a href="https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/#legaldoc-license">License</a>Â and <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/#legaldoc-notice">notice</a>Â files that accompany the content produced by an Eclipse Project describe the licenses that apply.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.9dhzr9lvkqh8"><a class="anchor" href="#h.9dhzr9lvkqh8"></a><a class="link" href="#h.9dhzr9lvkqh8">Why does the Eclipse Foundation redistribute some content under licenses other than the Eclipse Public License?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Sometimes the Project Management Committee (PMC) for an Eclipse Foundation Top-Level project may make a decision to include some content from another (third party) open source project. If that content cannot be contributed to an Eclipse Foundation project under the <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/legal/termsofuse.php#">Eclipse.org Terms of Use</a>Â and the content is not already licensed under EPL, the PMC may decide to use and redistribute the content under the terms and conditions of another license which would usually be the license that the content was received under.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>The Eclipse Foundation will only use non-EPL licensed content if the other license is an open source license approved by the <a href="http://www.opensource.org/licenses/#">Open Source Initiative</a> and it permits commercial products to be built on the software without requiring any form of royalty or other payment.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>In some cases the Eclipse Foundation redistributes unmodified non-EPL content and in other cases it redistributes derivative works of non-EPL content. Unmodified non-EPL content is included as a convenience to allow Eclipse Foundation software to be used without first having to locate, obtain, and integrate additional software.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.rnnp3o5bxq5"><a class="anchor" href="#h.rnnp3o5bxq5"></a><a class="link" href="#h.rnnp3o5bxq5">What licenses are acceptable for third-party content redistributed by Eclipse projects?        </a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>The Eclipse Foundation views license compatibility through the lens of enabling successful adoption of Eclipse technology in both open source and in commercial software products and services. We wish to create a ecosystem based on the redistribution of Eclipse software technologies which includes commercially licensed software products. Determining whether a license for third-party content is acceptable often requires the input and advice of Eclipse’s legal advisors.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>The <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/legal/licenses.php#">Third Party Content Licenses</a>Â page provides a list of the most common licenses approved for use by third party content redistributed by Eclipse Foundation Projects. If you have any questions, please contact Eclipse Licensing (<a href="mailto:license@eclipse.org">license@eclipse.org</a>).</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.r2y1yck33rg4"><a class="anchor" href="#h.r2y1yck33rg4"></a><a class="link" href="#h.r2y1yck33rg4">I see copyright notices from IBM and/or other companies. How can it be open source software if it is copyright IBM?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>You might want to do some background reading on copyright law or consult a lawyer. "Open source" doesn’t mean that the code does not have a copyright holder. All code has an author and that person is the copyright holder or owner unless the copyright is assigned to another party. In the case of the Eclipse Project, the initial code base was contributed by IBM. Over time, Eclipse Foundation projects have become populated with code provided by many different contributors and as result, different portions of the code have different copyright holders. Licenses such as the EPL grant you a copyright license (subject to certain terms and conditions) and that is how you receive copyright rights to use, modify, redistribute, etc. the content. Although you may receive copyright rights through the EPL, or another license, it still doesn’t change who the copyright holders are for various portions of the content.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="version"><a class="anchor" href="#version"></a><a class="link" href="#version">Which version of the Eclipse Public License does the Eclipse Foundation use?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>The current version is <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/legal/epl-2.0#">Version 2.0</a>. There is a separate <a href="http://www.eclipse.org/org/documents/epl-2.0/faq.php#">FAQ</a>Â that focuses entirely on the EPL.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.25gqlkbku1u9"><a class="anchor" href="#h.25gqlkbku1u9"></a><a class="link" href="#h.25gqlkbku1u9">Does the Eclipse Foundation have a patent policy?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Under the Eclipse Public License (EPL), each Contributor grants rights to create derivative works and for worldwide, royalty-free software redistribution in accordance with the EPL terms, including a royalty-free license to use Contributor’s patents as embodied in its contributions. Section 7 of the EPL includes the following:</p>
+</div>
+<div class="quoteblock">
+<blockquote>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>If Recipient institutes patent litigation against any entity (including a cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit) alleging that the Program itself (excluding combinations of the Program with other software or hardware) infringes such Recipient’s patent(s), then such Recipient’s rights granted under Section 2(b) shall terminate as of the date such litigation is filed.</p>
+</div>
+</blockquote>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.1legecavy5xx"><a class="anchor" href="#h.1legecavy5xx"></a><a class="link" href="#h.1legecavy5xx">May I please have a quote or see a price list for Eclipse software?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Eclipse software is free and open source software that is distributed royalty-free under the terms of the project license(s). If you are going to distribute Eclipse code, you should read our <a href="http://www.eclipse.org/legal/guidetolegaldoc.php#">Guidelines</a>Â and our <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/org/documents/epl-2.0/faq.php#">EPL FAQ</a>. They both contain a great deal of useful information.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect1">
+<h2 id="h.2gex0eipl1id"><a class="anchor" href="#h.2gex0eipl1id"></a><a class="link" href="#h.2gex0eipl1id">Contributions and Participation</a></h2>
+<div class="sectionbody">
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.reim5nd6ep3m"><a class="anchor" href="#h.reim5nd6ep3m"></a><a class="link" href="#h.reim5nd6ep3m">What agreement covers contributions I submit to an Eclipse Foundation project?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>The purpose of the Eclipse Contributor Agreement (ECA) is to provide a written record that a contributor has agreed to provide their contributions of code and documentation under the licenses used by the Eclipse Project(s) to which they are contributing. All contributors who are not already committers on the Eclipse Project to which they are contributing must <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/legal/ECA.php#">digitally sign the ECA</a>.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Contributors who are invited to join an Eclipse open source project must complete additional <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/#paperwork">committer paperwork</a>Â before they are granted write access to project resources. The Eclipse Foundation needs to ensure that all committers with write access to the code, websites, and issue tracking systems understand their role in the intellectual property process. The Eclipse Foundation also needs to ensure that we have accurate records of the people who are acting as change agents on the projects. To ensure that committers understand their role, and that the Eclipse Foundation has accurate records, committers must provide documentation asserting that they have read, understood, and will follow the committer guidelines. Committers must also gain their employers consent to their participation in Eclipse Foundation open source projects.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.26hpwm6wrcbu"><a class="anchor" href="#h.26hpwm6wrcbu"></a><a class="link" href="#h.26hpwm6wrcbu">Will Eclipse projects accept contributions to content that were not provided under the project license?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>The short answer to this question is "it depends".</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Content made available by the Eclipse Foundation is sometimes accompanied by or includes content based on third-party content. This third-party content is often sourced from other open source projects such as those run by the Apache Software Foundation. Eclipse Foundation projects try to avoid branching from other open source projects wherever possible. However sometimes it just can’t be avoided especially if the change is critical and the other project’s next release date is too far out or they won’t accept the change for some reason. Subsequently, while changes to third-party content (either unmodified or derivative works of) might be accepted and incorporated into the Eclipse Foundation codebase, Eclipse Foundation committers may often forward these changes to other open source projects and/or may ask contributors of such changes to do the same.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.l3bvwrmty0iz"><a class="anchor" href="#h.l3bvwrmty0iz"></a><a class="link" href="#h.l3bvwrmty0iz">What if I have legal questions about my contribution to the Eclipse Foundation?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>If the questions you have concern whether or not you can legally contribute the content to the Eclipse Foundation, you should consult a lawyer. If you are contributing content on behalf of the company you work for then you should probably ask your company’s legal department. It is up to you to ensure that you can satisfy section 2 d) of the EPL that says:</p>
+</div>
+<div class="quoteblock">
+<blockquote>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Each Contributor represents that to its knowledge it has sufficient copyright rights in its Contribution, if any, to grant the copyright license set forth in this Agreement.</p>
+</div>
+</blockquote>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Many companies have their own processes for handling contributions to open source projects.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect1">
+<h2 id="h.dris33ugmjs"><a class="anchor" href="#h.dris33ugmjs"></a><a class="link" href="#h.dris33ugmjs">Working as a Committer</a></h2>
+<div class="sectionbody">
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.egfvt1pcqyla"><a class="anchor" href="#h.egfvt1pcqyla"></a><a class="link" href="#h.egfvt1pcqyla">What are my obligations as a committer working on an Eclipse Foundation project?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>As a committer you have the ability to control the content distributed in the Eclipse Foundation source code repositories and downloads. Contributors may provide contributions to the Eclipse Foundation but such contributions do not exist in the repository or downloads unless they are accepted by a committer. Committers therefore have a responsibility to perform due diligence on any content they release.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.dw2jc7fvtv5t"><a class="anchor" href="#h.dw2jc7fvtv5t"></a><a class="link" href="#h.dw2jc7fvtv5t">What is the due diligence that a committer must perform?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>The <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/legal/committerguidelines.php#">Eclipse Committer Due Diligence Guidelines</a>Â outline the guidelines for committers.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.ifqjlo6ueqc7"><a class="anchor" href="#h.ifqjlo6ueqc7"></a><a class="link" href="#h.ifqjlo6ueqc7">What if I have legal questions when I am performing due diligence as a committer?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>You should contact the Project Management Committee (PMC) for your project.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.x0s5sxj1z2cp"><a class="anchor" href="#h.x0s5sxj1z2cp"></a><a class="link" href="#h.x0s5sxj1z2cp">Do I have to place copyright notices in all my code?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Yes. Where possible, copyright notices must be included the <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/#ip-copyright-headers">file headers</a>Â for all project content. This includes source files and, where possible, configuration. A best effort approach is expected, and so reasonable exceptions are acceptable (e.g. there is not standard means for providing a file header in JSON content). See the <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/#ip-copyright-headers">default copyright and license notice template</a>.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.tq9t96dkfm2y"><a class="anchor" href="#h.tq9t96dkfm2y"></a><a class="link" href="#h.tq9t96dkfm2y">If I change employers, what happens to my committer status at Eclipse?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Your committer status at the Eclipse Foundation is not based on your employment status. It is an individual recognition of your frequent and valuable contributions to one or more Eclipse projects. If you do change employers, please contact the EMO Records Team by email (<a href="mailto:emo-records@eclipse.org">emo-records@eclipse.org</a>) Â to ensure that the necessary employer consent paperwork is completed. For more details, please see the <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/#elections-committer">New Committer Process</a>.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect1">
+<h2 id="h.qu58e71q3dbc"><a class="anchor" href="#h.qu58e71q3dbc"></a><a class="link" href="#h.qu58e71q3dbc">Cryptography</a></h2>
+<div class="sectionbody">
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.xqxr6abpyq6y"><a class="anchor" href="#h.xqxr6abpyq6y"></a><a class="link" href="#h.xqxr6abpyq6y">Does software made available by the Eclipse Foundation contain cryptography?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>In some cases software made available by the Eclipse Foundation may contain cryptography. For example, the Eclipse Platform contains cryptography and has been classified as Export Control Classification Number (ECCN) 5D002.c.1 by the U.S. Government Department of Commerce, Bureau of Industry and Security. All object code and source code for Eclipse projects are eligible for export from the United States of America under 15 CFR §742.15(b), and deemed not subject to Export Administration Regulations as publicly available encryption source code classified ECCN 5D002.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p><a href="https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/#legaldoc-notice">Notice files</a> (e.g. an about.html files in Eclipse Platform Plug-ins)  contain information about the specific algorithms, key sizes, and other important information that may be required to obtain additional export control classifications and approvals.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<div class="sect2">
+<h3 id="h.skw921k3c85n"><a class="anchor" href="#h.skw921k3c85n"></a><a class="link" href="#h.skw921k3c85n">Why is cryptography discussed in notices?</a></h3>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Some countries have restrictions regarding the export, import, possession, and use, and/or re-export to another country, another person or for a particular use of encryption software, but it does not restrict you in any way nor require you to do anything special if you receive encryption software from the Eclipse Foundation. In other words, it is your responsibility to determine what laws and regulations apply to you and to act appropriately.</p>
+</div>
+<hr>
+<div class="paragraph">
+<p>Last updated on December 20/2017</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+</div>
+</div>
+</div>
+</body>
+</html>
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/js/src/legal/generate-faqs.js b/js/src/legal/generate-faqs.js
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..36bfc0390b7cdae1ba7c4b12af2d2095c04ee2ad
--- /dev/null
+++ b/js/src/legal/generate-faqs.js
@@ -0,0 +1,28 @@
+/**
+ * Copyright (c) 2024 Eclipse Foundation and others.
+ *
+ * This program and the accompanying materials are made
+ * available under the terms of the Eclipse Public License 2.0
+ * which is available at https://www.eclipse.org/legal/epl-2.0/
+ *
+ * SPDX-License-Identifier: EPL-2.0
+ */
+
+/**
+ * Retrieves the innerHTML of a static html document's body.
+ *
+ * @param {string} path - The path to the static html document.
+ * @returns {Promise<string>} A promise which resolves to the innerHTML of the static html
+ * document.
+ * @throws
+ */
+const getBodyContent = async (path) => {
+ const response = await fetch(path);
+ const text = await response.text();
+
+ const htmlDocument = new DOMParser().parseFromString(text, 'text/html');
+ if (!htmlDocument.body) throw TypeError('No body element has been found in ' + path);
+
+ return htmlDocument.body.innerHTML;
+};
+