www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alexey Petrenko" <alexey.a.petre...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [classlib][awt] Default fonts needed for headless support (was Re:[contributions][awt] Font library)
Date Tue, 17 Jul 2007 07:28:10 GMT
So we can use it in Harmony. Great!
This will solve a number of problems for us.

Thanks a lot for your help, guys!

SY, Alexey

2007/7/17, Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>:
> On Jul 16, 2007, at 4:01 PM, Mark Thomas wrote:
> > Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> >> On Jul 16, 2007, at 3:02 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
> >>> On Mon, 2007-07-16 at 17:33 +0400, Alexey Petrenko wrote:
> >>>> 2007/7/16, Dmitriy Matveev <matveev.dmitriy@gmail.com>:
> >>>>> We can take this bundle of fonts as a variant:
> >>>>> http://dejavu.sourceforge.net/wiki/index.php/Main_Page
> >>>>>
> >>>>> License is there:
> >>>>> http://dejavu.sourceforge.net/wiki/index.php/License
> >>>> Is it possible to include these fonts to Harmony?
> >>
> >> It is a reworded Apache 1.1 license with one additional clause
> >>
> >>    The Font Software may be sold as part of a larger software
> >>    package but no copy of one or more of the Font Software
> >>    typefaces may be sold by itself.
> >>
> >> which has no impact on us or anyone who redistributes our packages.
> >> That means it is okay provided that the license is added to our
> >> product's LICENSE file noting what it applies to.
> >
> > Isn't this an additional restriction over and above the terms of AL2?
>
> Only when it is sold as an individual typeface.  It does not restrict
> our software in any way.
>
> > My understanding of our position (and I would be more than happy to be
> > corrected on this) is that anything we include should not be more
> > restrictive than AL2.
>
> It isn't more restrictive when it is included.
>
> > As I understand AL2, I can take any element (or elements) of an Apache
> > distribution, package it/them however I like and (providing I meet the
> > redistribution requirements of section AL2.4) sell them for as much as
> > I can get away with.
>
> No.  You can take anything licensed by the ASF in that way.  These
> fonts are not licensed by the ASF.
>
> > These don't appear to be compatible. Where have I got it wrong?
>
> It is not our software.  Compatible means that we can safely and
> legally distribute our software in combination with theirs, which
> we can under that license, and that the resulting package as a
> whole can be redistributed under terms no more restrictive than
> the Apache License terms.  That clause does not restrict our
> packages.
>
> ....Roy
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
> only.  Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
> constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
> and policies of the ASF.  See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
> official ASF policies and documents.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only.  Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF.  See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org


Mime
View raw message