www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kevan Miller <kevan.mil...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: LICENSE, NOTICE and bundling Hunspell Diciionaries
Date Fri, 12 Sep 2014 00:54:34 GMT
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 12:11 PM, Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com> wrote:

> Hmm, no takers?
>
> Let me try to simplify the questions:
>
> 1) The "how to" says you can include a "short" license in LICENSE.


The howto says that it is "best reserved for short licenses". That doesn't
exclude "long" licenses.


> In a
> collective license like in [1] is that a "short" license because there is
> a short paragraph for the collection, or is this a long license because a
> collective license is the entire thing including the "sub"-licenses?
>

I don't think there's a subjective metric for "short" or "long". IMO, it's
probably referring to the length of the license, not the presence or
absence of sub-licenses, paragraphs, etc.


>
> 2) If the answer to #1 is "long", then is a text file containing the
> entire license co-located with the bundled dictionary considered
> "supporting documentation" or is the NOTICE file for the bundling Flex
> product the "supporting documentation"?
>

Don't use the NOTICE, unless you have to (i.e. a LICENSE requires it). In
this case, nothing is required to go in the NOTICE file. So, don't do it.

Personally, I like to see the entire licenses in LICENSE files, not
pointers to licenses. The length of the license is not an issue.

--kevan

Mime
View raw message