[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Wordlist License
- To: "Documentation and Translation" <doc at arabeyes dot org>
- Subject: Re: Wordlist License
- From: "Anas R." <anas dot linuxfuture at gmail dot com>
- Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2007 21:26:21 +0200
- Dkim-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:date:from:to:subject:x-mailer:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:message-id; b=FlkqN3OES3TJcdF9+vF+/GDecbvBRmluyG1keT4P9B/+fdpU+q4tHNfquIUArqMj43WPcsPgWj2AA6fvss/VCwbVZmQ3UpBue0KfPYhQtihFDl2qq8rw/auASueB708hhB0kH0D9PzMQd39l4Vfa4m2HQiEhOMFs46ugjW5/t3o=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:date:from:to:subject:x-mailer:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:message-id; b=ryKQ6upu+fWbKCbyA4jRw7JN7kK5SEgJbTLGNhsoXf+0/jBPikxne3BStXjNkm5C4Fp3mlrXpE8xtjzBFkiCiQ25HoGv/tTC+Oe/S/J4Wj9y9xiF2jnvp5PQRjwtvXqT5MPi6puHvJLjuoCi2BoNa8F3Amp/MPouiHs4+pt2mas=
======= At 2007-03-03, 19:54:04 you wrote: =======
>On Saturday 03 March 2007 17:36, Anas R. wrote:
>> I don't think that FDL is good for dictionaries... it seems like we need
>> sort of FDL+LGPL licence.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> - Anas R.
>
> FDL+LGPL = ?
Dictionary is a 'printable library'
>Licensing a dictionary seems strange. Should I license my document that I used
>the Wordlist to write it to GPL?
No, but I mean dictionary could be used as a library for other Software Applications, i.e:
Can Microsoft, or any commercial software provider ship Arabeyes's dictionary (as a database) in its commercial products?,
In its Office suite for example?
>In the same time, can I translate a new
>wordlist using Arabeyes' Wordlist and license it to X-PL? Can I
>copyright "Green=أخضر"?
Well, there was a discussion about copyrighting dictionaries in GNU mailing list,
here's a brief summary: http://www.linuxfuture.org/archives/2007/02/entry_32.html
- Anas R.