www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Henri Yandell <bay...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Hunspell Dictionary Usage
Date Sun, 31 Aug 2014 00:32:23 GMT
On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 7:28 AM, Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Apache Flex was getting ready to ship a release of an ActionScript
> spell-checker when we discovered that the dictionaries of the major
> languages have LGPL-licensing.  Looks like the issue has been discussed
> many times for other products like Lucene and AOO, but I would like a
> ruling for Apache Flex:
>
> Can Apache Flex:
>
> 1) Approve a release whose only capability uses LGPL dictionaries?
> 2) Integrate the code as an optional feature of the main Flex SDK?
>
> The section of "Legal Resolved" that caught my eye is this:
>
> -----
> Can Apache projects rely on components whose licensing affects the Apache
> product?Apache projects cannot distribute any such components. However, if
> the component is only needed for optional features, a project can provide
> the user with instructions on how to obtain and install the non-included
> work. Optional means that the component is not required for standard use
> of the product or for the product to achieve a desirable level of quality.
> The question to ask yourself in this situation is:
>
> * "Will the majority of users want to use my product without adding the
> optional components?"
> -----
>
> From that text, it implies the answer to #1 is no, and to #2 is yes.
>
>
>
If you're saying that Flex's ActionScript spellchecker would not include
the LGPL/GPL dictionaries and would instead only provide instructions on
how to obtain them, then that would seem to fit the situation described in
Legal Resolved.

Hen

Mime
View raw message