ORA-2.2
An individual developer contributing back, under ORA 2.2
One person, no company, releasing or consuming work in their own name. Sending a patch, an issue, or a defect report upstream. This resolves to the Root tier.
Tier
Owed
Nothing. No fee, no report, no filing.
Sections in play
1.7, 2.1, 2.2, 8.2
Who and what
The situation being resolved.
Actor
An individual developer
One person, no company, releasing or consuming work in their own name.
none
Situation
Contributing back
Sending a patch, an issue, or a defect report upstream.
Rulings
3 questions resolved against the text.
Which tier applies?
Root. One person, no company, releasing or consuming work in their own name. Below $20,000,000 in trailing revenue, or within an exempt category, no Canopy royalty applies. Sections 4, 6, 8, and 10 still bind every Licensee.
Sections 1.7, 2.1, 2.2
Is anything owed?
Nothing. No fee, no report, no filing.
Sections 2.1
What must a contribution disclose?
That it is your own work, or is appropriately licensed and identified as such, or was produced with the assistance of an AI tool and which tool. Section 8.2 extends this to issues and defect reports, not only code, because the volume problem maintainers face is reports rather than patches.
Sections 8.2
Cautions
What this situation gets wrong most often.
Revenue is measured across entities under common control, per Section 1.4. A parent company above the threshold makes its subsidiary a Canopy Licensee regardless of that subsidiary's own turnover.
Attribution lives in the package manifest under ORA 8.1, not only in documentation, because an agent package is installed by a machine that never reads a directory listing.
Same actor
Other situations for this party.
Non-normative. Where this and the licence text disagree, the licence text applies.