this provision is supposed to apply only to the original upstream licensor

> Just seen this!!!

> Which implies a total mis-understanding of copyright.

> You can NEVER NEVER NEVER apply a copyright licence clause to the original licensor. The whole point of being the licens*or* is that you are granting rights to others. They can have no claim whatsoever against you.

The way this is being discussed here is confusing and wrong, but the actual licence doesn't make that mistake. The relevant clause is as follows:

>If, more than one year after My first Distribution of My Work under this
>License, I offer to license a Covered Work in a manner that fails to
>satisfy the Open Source Definition published by the Open Source
>Initiative as of 1 January 2013, then I additionally license My Work to
>You under the Apache License (excluding any preexisting material
>contained in My Work over which I do not hold copyright).

Ie. the copyright owner is granting additional rights that become available in the specified circumstances. The licence doesn't claim to change the rights of the licensor; as you say, that would be nonsense.