www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Dennis E. Hamilton (Commented) (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (LEGAL-117) Aggregation of GPL dictionaries with Apache OpenOffice (incubating) binary releases
Date Sun, 11 Dec 2011 22:34:40 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-117?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13167230#comment-13167230
] 

Dennis E. Hamilton commented on LEGAL-117:
------------------------------------------

@Andrea @Sam

A little more Sunday reflections.  (The technicalities will be discussed back on the project
and perhaps on the project wiki.)

Here's a hypothetical steady state:

 1. Bundled dictionary extensions (and any other extensions that are bundled, for that matter),
are installed by binary releases as *.oxt extension packages in appropriate locations under
the installation location of the binary run-time.  That is, they are indistinguishable from
the same *.oxt downloaded from an extension site, but installed within the binary release
installation configuration (and vetted for that purpose).  All use of the extension content
is cached privately as necessary and exercised by the run-time using the standard, license
agnostic functions that the run-time has for relying on dictionary extensions of any origin.
 So it is clear that these aqgregations are kept intact and only bundled but not integrated
any more than if an user had downloaded them independently.

 2. OpenOffice.org already provides an extension-management interface (usable for installing
separately downloaded extensions) that also allows extensions to be removed or disabled. 
It is not and would not be possible to export extensions.  However, it is not a stretch to
consider that the extension management panel shown for an individual extension could also
provide access to license information and an authoritative location where the *.oxt was/is
obtainable from.  If a "source code offer" is required, it could be presented there as well.

 3. Bundling of dictionary extensions would be limited to ones that allow literal distribution
without restriction and have no limitations that impact field of use of the run-time.  The
vetting of bundled dictionary extensions (and any other bundled extensions) would be to ensure
that any license conditions on the *.otx-contained artifacts are being honored in the occurence
of those artifacts in the *.otx and that having an additional level of bundling in a binary-release
installer is clearly allowed and appropriate.

There remain some question on what the upstream source is and how that is separate from Apache
OpenOffice when a *.otx is not an ALv2-licensed object, but that is something the project
can work out so that the deployment approach of (1-3) can be implemented in a sanitary way.
                
> Aggregation of GPL dictionaries with Apache OpenOffice (incubating) binary releases
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LEGAL-117
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-117
>             Project: Legal Discuss
>          Issue Type: Question
>            Reporter: Andrea Pescetti
>
> Localized versions of OpenOffice.org have traditionally included dictionaries (a term
used to designate data files for writing aids in general, like spell-checking dictionaries
and thesauri) under the GPL license. These dictionaries are provided in the form of data files.
> Dictionaries are not a dependency of OpenOffice.org: they are packaged, even in the installer
for native builds, as extensions. Any Windows version of OpenOffice.org is shipped as one
file, containing separate modules for OpenOffice.org and for each linguistic extension (i.e.,
the dictionaries).
> This is possible because OpenOffice.org dictionaries, as confirmed by the Free Software
Foundation in 2007 https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=65039 fall in the "mere aggregation"
provision of the GPL license http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#MereAggregation
> The only remaining issue to be able to include GPL dictionaries in Apache OpenOffice
is thus the Apache policy http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html which forbids GPL software
from being included in Apache projects; but the rationale for this choice http://www.apache.org/licenses/GPL-compatibility.html
clearly states that "This licensing incompatibility applies only when some Apache project
software becomes a derivative work of some GPLv3 software", definitely not the case under
discussion.
> In light of the above, can Apache OpenOffice include GPL spell-checking dictionaries
with its binary releases? 

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

        

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org


Mime
View raw message