Mailing-List: contact legal-discuss-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: legal-discuss@apache.org
Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2011 06:01:43 +0000 (UTC)
From: "Dennis E. Hamilton (Commented) (JIRA)" <jira@apache.org>
To: legal-discuss@apache.org
Message-ID: 
 <1609831394.61382.1323496903280.JavaMail.tomcat@hel.zones.apache.org>
In-Reply-To: 
 <2090213583.39153.1323018939870.JavaMail.tomcat@hel.zones.apache.org>
Subject: [jira] [Commented] (LEGAL-117) Aggregation of GPL dictionaries with
 Apache OpenOffice (incubating) binary releases
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-117?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13166799#comment-13166799 ] 

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

@Andrea @Sam,

I would like to confine this to the specific question of dictionaries (i.e., writing aids) to be distributed and installed in user run-times via Apache OpenOffice binaries created by the podling as release companions or whatever the proper term is.  It would be useful to pick a problematic one and see how the following questions can be answered: 

 1. How are these distributed/made-available in the first place, by their authors, and how is licensing and other notices affixed and how is the location of available "source" indicated?  

 2. Is the writing aid meant to be editable or modifiable by users for more than their own private purposes?  There are already questions on other lists about being able to modify the stock dictionaries via user function  (e.g., being able to add a word spelling to the distributed spell-checking dictionary rather than a supplement carried by the run-time.).

 3. Is it appropriate (and feasible) to ensure that the released binary's run-time cannot be used to modify such writing aids and thereby create derivative works using features of the Apache OpenOffice release itself?

 4. Is the GPL (or other type-B or type-X) notice affixed to the artifact in a way where it cannot go unnoticed?  That is, if someone fishes a writing-aid out from where it is stored by installation of the binary run-time, it is unmistakeable that there are non-ALv2 license terms, that the artifact's presence satisfies the non-ALv2 conditions, and that separate distribution is subject to the non-ALv2 conditions.

Perhaps this narrows the question enough to satisfy any ASF concern about packaging user-separatable non-ALv2 artifacts in the released binary. 
                
> 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