incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Pedro Giffuni <...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Apache Licensed Fonts (was Re: Font related questions)
Date Fri, 18 Nov 2011 19:35:47 GMT
Hi;

--- On Fri, 11/18/11, Rob Weir <robweir@apache.org> wrote:

> Pedro Giffuni wrote:
> > Hi;
> >
> > OFL has two big issues:
> > 1) It's copyleft so we cannot put it in the
> repository.
> > 2) It cannot be redistributed on it's own: it has
> > to be bundled with software, so we cannot make it
> > available as and add-on package by itself.
> >
> 
> I don't see the problem here.  It says, "Neither the
> Font Software nor
> any of its individual components, in Original or Modified
> Versions,
> may be sold by itself."  But we're not selling the
> font in any form, bundled or not.
> 

Still that is a limitation and I am not sure it fits
within ASF policies. The code produced by the ASF can
be resold and users expect to be able to unbundle and
rebundle as they see fit.

> Why can't we just download it as part of the build
> script?  It is not
> in SVN then, and we only include it in the binary release?
>

I think we can do this, yes.
 
> This looks acceptable per: (1)
> http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#no-modification
> 
> > The bitstream vera / dejavu fonts are not without
> issues:
> > " ... no copy of one or more of the Font Software
> typefaces
> >  may be sold by itself."
> >
> 
> Again, we are not selling it "by itself".
>

I think the "no-sell" clause contradicts the
"Software License Criteria".

But I am not in the business of being a PITA for
the project, I just think this has to be reviewed
by legal.

While here a general question: do we have to mention
"Category-B" software in the NOTICE file?
I say we shouldn't since we are not including any
source code for that in in the SVN server or in
the releases, we will just use the binaries if
they are available.

Pedro.

Pedro.

Mime
View raw message