You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to legal-discuss@apache.org by Gao Pinker <xi...@gmail.com> on 2009/04/25 03:06:06 UTC
license problem about contributing lucene Chinese analyzer
Hi All!
I wrote a Analyzer for apache lucene for analyzing sentences in
*Chinese*language, it's called
*imdict-chinese-analyzer* as it is a subproject of
*imdict*<http://www.imdict.net/>,
which is an intelligent online dictionary.
*imdict-chinese-analyzer* is a really fast intelligent Chinese Analyzer for
lucene written in Java. The project on google code is here:
http://code.google.com/p/imdict-chinese-analyzer/
As there is no proper analyzer for *Chinese language *in apache lucene
repository, I want to contribute it to the "*contrib/analyzers*" component
of "*apache lucene-Java*" project.
*The problem is*:
This Analyzer contains two packages, *the source code* and the *lexical
dictionary*. I want to publish the source code using Apache license, but the
lexical dictionary which is under an ambigus license was not create by me.
So, can I only submit the source code to lucene contribution repository, and
make a text reference to the dictionary to let the users download it from
its google code site? Will there be any conflict with apache license?
please help me about this contribution. Thank you!
Re: license problem about contributing lucene Chinese analyzer
Posted by Craig L Russell <Cr...@Sun.COM>.
Hi Gao,
You have written that the copyright owner will license the code
according to the Apache license. So it appears that this discussion is
moot from the perspective of the particular license, but does raise a
question.
When the license to a work is in a non-English language, it's very
tricky to determine whether that license is compatible with the Apache
license. And taking this from the opposite perspective, we don't
translate the Apache license into any other languages so it's up to
users to decide if the Apache license is appropriate for their use.
Regards,
Craig
On Apr 27, 2009, at 6:37 PM, Gao Pinker wrote:
> Section 5 means you just send a notice to let the author know you are
> including it in a commersial product.
>
> You don't have to be permitted when you want to do this.
>
> 2009/4/27, Craig L Russell <Cr...@sun.com>:
>>
>> On Apr 26, 2009, at 11:42 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>>
>>> Gao Pinker wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I think their license sounds a little like apache license, as it
>>>> allows
>>>> commercial usage.
>>>
>>> Without going deeply into it tonight, this license is class X in our
>>> interoperability matrix.
>>
>> I agree.
>>
>>> Modifications and Commercial redistribution
>>> are both encumbered at least to some extent.
>>
>> The section 5 discussing commercial redistribution is completely
>> confusing (probably a bad translation). In particular, "informed by
>> written consent" doesn't mean anything to me.
>>
>> <<5. If Users would like to use the Source for their commercial
>> product,
>> they must state clearly the Source owner copy right and the Owner
>> must
>> be informed by written consent>>
>>
>> Craig
>>>
>>>
>>> It is not similar to AL.
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>>>
>>
>> Craig L Russell
>> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://db.apache.org/jdo
>> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
>> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>
Craig L Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://db.apache.org/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
Re: reciprocity? (was Re: license problem about contributing lucene
Chinese analyzer)
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 9:18 PM, Paul Libbrecht <pa...@activemath.org> wrote:
> this clarifies your view... pretty much a general reciprocity indeed.
> However, reciprocity here does not propagate and this is a whole lot of a
> difference!
> I.e. an APL-licensed work may be linked with such a license I feel (but not
> within ASF I think).
I think it does. We need to pass this license downstream, so IF
someone picks up the Apache project and includes it in a commercial
product, that user would need to notify the Copyright owner. It may
seem fair, but AFAIK current policy is that "Give Credit" is the
maximum we allow to be enforced on downstream users. But I could be
wrong...
Cheers
--
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java
I live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er
I work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc
I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: reciprocity? (was Re: license problem about contributing lucene Chinese analyzer)
Posted by Paul Libbrecht <pa...@activemath.org>.
Le 28-avr.-09 à 12:16, Bertrand Delacretaz a écrit :
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 9:57 AM, Paul Libbrecht
> <pa...@activemath.org> wrote:
>>
>> The many possible disambiguations of en.wikipedia.org didn't help
>> me....
>
> I think the explanation at
> http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/opensource/library/os-license2/ is
> pretty good.
That seems to be a definition of reciprocal similar to copylefting, in
the parlance I am used to.
That was not at all what Niclas referred to as being reciprocal though.
Début du message réexpédié :
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 9:37 AM, Gao Pinker <xi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> Section 5 means you just send a notice to let the author know you are
>> including it in a commersial product.
>
> We call that reciprocity, and is not acceptable terms for our projects
> and its downstream users.
> English not being my mother tongue, but AFAIK, Reciprocity is
> effectively what act you have to do to obtain the favor in question.
> In licensing, it refers to the counter requirements for you to obtain
> the license. In this case, you must notify the licensor that you are
> including the work in a commercial product. ASF would need to pass
> this requirement downstream to our users, which is beyond the
> requirement of "Give Credit" that we have accepted.
this clarifies your view... pretty much a general reciprocity indeed.
However, reciprocity here does not propagate and this is a whole lot
of a difference!
I.e. an APL-licensed work may be linked with such a license I feel
(but not within ASF I think).
I was looking at the clause of reciprocity with respect to "letting
the authors receiving noticed about the usage".
paul
Re: reciprocity? (was Re: license problem about contributing lucene
Chinese analyzer)
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 9:57 AM, Paul Libbrecht <pa...@activemath.org> wrote:
> Le 28-avr.-09 à 06:34, Niclas Hedhman a écrit :
>> ...We call that reciprocity, and is not acceptable terms for our projects
>> and its downstream users.
>
> ...could you give a few pointers about that concept?
> The many possible disambiguations of en.wikipedia.org didn't help me....
I think the explanation at
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/opensource/library/os-license2/ is
pretty good.
-Bertrand
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: reciprocity? (was Re: license problem about contributing lucene
Chinese analyzer)
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 3:57 PM, Paul Libbrecht <pa...@activemath.org> wrote:
>>> Section 5 means you just send a notice to let the author know you are
>>> including it in a commersial product.
>>
>> We call that reciprocity, and is not acceptable terms for our projects
>> and its downstream users.
> could you give a few pointers about that concept?
> The many possible disambiguations of en.wikipedia.org didn't help me.
>
> I think this is a license clause that, although contrary to all open-source
> movements, is very often wished by fearing embarkers to open-source or
> open-content potential licensors. Technically, it has a chance to be
> realized in much a different way than "warning", I feel.
Not totally sure of what you are asking;
English not being my mother tongue, but AFAIK, Reciprocity is
effectively what act you have to do to obtain the favor in question.
In licensing, it refers to the counter requirements for you to obtain
the license. In this case, you must notify the licensor that you are
including the work in a commercial product. ASF would need to pass
this requirement downstream to our users, which is beyond the
requirement of "Give Credit" that we have accepted.
Cheers
--
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java
I live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er
I work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc
I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: reciprocity? (was Re: license problem about contributing lucene Chinese analyzer)
Posted by Paul Libbrecht <pa...@activemath.org>.
Le 28-avr.-09 à 06:34, Niclas Hedhman a écrit :
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 9:37 AM, Gao Pinker <xi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> Section 5 means you just send a notice to let the author know you are
>> including it in a commersial product.
>
> We call that reciprocity, and is not acceptable terms for our projects
> and its downstream users.
Niclas,
could you give a few pointers about that concept?
The many possible disambiguations of en.wikipedia.org didn't help me.
I think this is a license clause that, although contrary to all open-
source movements, is very often wished by fearing embarkers to open-
source or open-content potential licensors. Technically, it has a
chance to be realized in much a different way than "warning", I feel.
paul
Re: license problem about contributing lucene Chinese analyzer
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Gao Pinker wrote:
> Good news!
>
> The author of the lexical dictionary promised to give me a copy under
> apache license!
>
> As Hedhman said, the author's intent is to provide a open dictionary to
> the open-source community, the license is much like APLv2,
> so I persuaded them to release another copy under APLv2 :)
That is great news! The ALv2 is designed to encourage adoption and it
sounds like that is what the author intended in the first place :)
> Thank you for all your help!
Always welcome. Thanks for the interesting puzzle :)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: license problem about contributing lucene Chinese analyzer
Posted by Gao Pinker <xi...@gmail.com>.
Good news!
The author of the lexical dictionary promised to give me a copy under apache
license!
As Hedhman said, the author's intent is to provide a open dictionary to the
open-source community, the license is much like APLv2,
so I persuaded them to release another copy under APLv2 :)
Thank you for all your help!
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 12:34 PM, Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 9:37 AM, Gao Pinker <xi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Section 5 means you just send a notice to let the author know you are
> > including it in a commersial product.
>
> We call that reciprocity, and is not acceptable terms for our projects
> and its downstream users.
>
> Sorry. See my other suggestion.
>
> Cheers
> --
> Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
> http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java
>
> I live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er
> I work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc
> I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>
>
Re: license problem about contributing lucene Chinese analyzer
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 9:37 AM, Gao Pinker <xi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Section 5 means you just send a notice to let the author know you are
> including it in a commersial product.
We call that reciprocity, and is not acceptable terms for our projects
and its downstream users.
Sorry. See my other suggestion.
Cheers
--
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java
I live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er
I work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc
I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: license problem about contributing lucene Chinese analyzer
Posted by Gao Pinker <xi...@gmail.com>.
Section 5 means you just send a notice to let the author know you are
including it in a commersial product.
You don't have to be permitted when you want to do this.
2009/4/27, Craig L Russell <Cr...@sun.com>:
>
> On Apr 26, 2009, at 11:42 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>
>> Gao Pinker wrote:
>>>
>>> I think their license sounds a little like apache license, as it
>>> allows
>>> commercial usage.
>>
>> Without going deeply into it tonight, this license is class X in our
>> interoperability matrix.
>
> I agree.
>
>> Modifications and Commercial redistribution
>> are both encumbered at least to some extent.
>
> The section 5 discussing commercial redistribution is completely
> confusing (probably a bad translation). In particular, "informed by
> written consent" doesn't mean anything to me.
>
> <<5. If Users would like to use the Source for their commercial product,
> they must state clearly the Source owner copy right and the Owner must
> be informed by written consent>>
>
> Craig
>>
>>
>> It is not similar to AL.
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>>
>
> Craig L Russell
> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://db.apache.org/jdo
> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: license problem about contributing lucene Chinese analyzer
Posted by Craig L Russell <Cr...@Sun.COM>.
On Apr 26, 2009, at 11:42 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> Gao Pinker wrote:
>>
>> I think their license sounds a little like apache license, as it
>> allows
>> commercial usage.
>
> Without going deeply into it tonight, this license is class X in our
> interoperability matrix.
I agree.
> Modifications and Commercial redistribution
> are both encumbered at least to some extent.
The section 5 discussing commercial redistribution is completely
confusing (probably a bad translation). In particular, "informed by
written consent" doesn't mean anything to me.
<<5. If Users would like to use the Source for their commercial product,
they must state clearly the Source owner copy right and the Owner must
be informed by written consent>>
Craig
>
>
> It is not similar to AL.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>
Craig L Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://db.apache.org/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
Re: license problem about contributing lucene Chinese analyzer
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Gao Pinker wrote:
>
> I think their license sounds a little like apache license, as it allows
> commercial usage.
Without going deeply into it tonight, this license is class X in our
interoperability matrix. Modifications and Commercial redistribution
are both encumbered at least to some extent.
It is not similar to AL.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: license problem about contributing lucene Chinese analyzer
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
2009/4/27 Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>:
My first impression (provided the translation is accurate enough);
1. Not very consistent.
2. Ambiguous.
For instance;
> Users are free to copy and distribute this license, but are not
> allowed to make any changes the content under any circumstances.
vs.
> Users are free to copy, publish or modify the Source, but they must
> adhere the "Natural Language Processing Open Source License" (License
> Version 1.0) terms and conditions.
where one part claims you must not modify and the other that you are
free to do so.
Perhaps you could contact the group and see if you could get the
necessary part granted under the Apache License separately from the
website's download. After all, I think that they intend to be a
permissible license similar to ALv2 (perhaps with an intended
modification restriction) but don't have the legal resources to
express this in the language of their choice.
Cheers
--
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java
I live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er
I work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc
I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: license problem about contributing lucene Chinese analyzer
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 8:54 PM, Gao Pinker <xi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I found the license here:
> http://www.nlp.org.cn/docs/download.php?proj_id=6&prog_id=1
>
> But it's in Chinese, so let me translate the main part:
I have Chinese guys working for me, and they did a non-lawyer
translation. I would like to hear people confirm and/or correct this,
so I post it first, and will make my own comments later.
- o - o - o -
自然语言处理开放资源许可证
版本1.1 2002年12月
中文自然语言处理开放平台（http://www.nlp.org.cn） 2002年版权所有
Open source natural language processing license.
Version 1.1 December, 2002
Chinese natural language processing open platform.
（http://www.nlp.org.cn） 2002 copyright.
使用者可以自由的复制和发布本许可证，但是在任何情况下都不能修改本许可证的内容。
Users are free to copy and distribute this license, but are not
allowed to make any changes the content under any circumstances.
本许可证（License）是为“中文自然语言处理开放平台(http://www.nlp.org.cn)”上的开放资源而制定。
如果要使用按照本许可证授权方式发布的开放资源，使用者应遵守以下条款：
This license is written for Open Natural Language Open Platform .
You must adhere the following terms if you would like to use any part
of the open source that are protected by this license.
一、 本许可证所提及的“自然语言处理开放资源”（以下简称“资源”），指的是在“中文自然语言处理开放平台(http://www.nlp.org.cn)”上发布的、随本许可证同时发放的软件、源代码、程序库、文档、词典、语料库等资源。
1. Natural language processing open source (refer to "Source" from
here onward ) being mentioned here refer to software, source code,
program, document, dictionary, data etc published through "Chinese
Natural Processing Open Platform" (http://www.nlp.org.cn)
二、 资源的全部著作权、知识产权属原始著作权人所有。
2. Source's copyright and intellectual property are all belong to the
original owner.
三、 使用者可以免费使用、复制和传播资源，但在复制和传播资源的过程中应该保证资源的完整性，并保证本许可证随着资源同时被复制和转播。
3. Users are free to use, copy and distribute Source, but SHOULD
ensure its completeness, and the the License is copied and distributed
together with the Source.
四、 著作权人不提供技术支持，同时不承担由于使用者使用自由资源造成任何损失的责任。
4. The owner of Source doesn't provide any technical support, nor
liable to Users for any lost or damage that cause by the Source.
五、 如果使用者将资源用于自己开发的产品、软件中并进行销售，则在您的产品或软件销售过程中必须在醒目位置上注明使用了著作权人的作品或软件，同时书面通知著作权人。
5. If Users would like to use the Source for their commercial product,
they must state clearly the Source owner copy right and the Owner must
be informed by written consent
六、 如果使用者将资源用于自己研究的课题，则在课题申请、验收、论文发表或技术报告时，必须在醒目位置上注明使用了著作权人的作品或软件，同时通过电子邮件或书面通知著作权人。
6. If Users would like to use the Source in their own research, they
must mention the copyright owner when they are applying, receiving,
announcing thesis or making technical report. Owner must be informed
by written consent.
七、 使用者可以修改并优化资源，但必须保证原有资源的完整性，即能够从修改版本中方便的恢复原来版本，修改后的资源必须注明原创者与著作权人；欢迎在“中文自然语言处理开放平台”(http://www.nlp.org.cn)上公开发布修改后的资源，以共同促进自然语言处理的发展。
7.Users can make changes and improve the Source, but must ensure its
completeness, and the modified or improved Source can be reverted back
to its original copy easily. Modified or improved Source must state
clearly the creator and copy right owner. You are welcome to publish
your modified or improved Source on "Natural Language ProcessingOpen
Platform (http://www.nlp.org.cn), to further improve the development
of natural language processing.
八、 如果使用者有任何对资源知识产权的侵权行为或违反上述规定，著作权人有权停止其使用权，并保留要求经济赔偿及追究法律责任的权利。
8. If the users found infringing the copyright or or the above temrs,
the copyright owner reserve the right to prevent to stop the user from
using the Source, and request for compensation or taking legal action.
九、 本许可证的具体条款内容有可能在今后被更新。新版本的许可证将继续忠实于促进自然语言处理领域的学术资源开放共享的精神。新版本的许可证将具有一个独立的版本编号和发布日期。如果资源没有指定特定的许可证版本编号，或者被声明为适用于本许可证的任何版本，那么使用者就可以自由的选择本许可证的任何版本（必须为公开发布的正式版本）作为资源的许可证授权方式。许可证版本更新的详细信息将在“中文自然语言处理开放平台”（http://www.nlp.org.cn）上公开发布。
9. This License terms may be modified in future. New version of this
license will continue to make improvement to the Natural language
processing and keep the spirit of open source sharing. New version
will have its own reference number and released date. If the Source
doesn't reference number of the license, or being stated as valid for
any version of License, which means Users are free to use any version
of the License. New version of the license is always published through
"Natural Language Processing Open Platform.
附录：如何在您将要发布的资源中应用“自然语言处理开放资源许可证”？
Attachment: How do you publish Source under "Natural Language
Processing Open Source License"?
请将下面这段文字加到您要发布的资源的醒目位置，例如每一个源文件的头部。
Please insert the following text on obvious place, example, each
Source file should have a header
<这一行是资源名称和用途的简要介绍>
<This line is for the name of the Source and the summary of its Usage>
<著作权人> <年份>版权所有
<Copyright Owner><year>
<著作权人联系方式>
<Copyright owner contact information>
本资源的发布，完全是为了促进自然语言处理领域的学术交流与资源共享。
The publication of this Source, mainly for the improvement of Natural
Language Processing and Open Source sharing.
使用者可以自由的拷贝、发布或者修改本资源，但是必须完全遵守“自然语言处理开放资源许可证”（许可证版本编号1.0）中所列各项条款之规定。
Users are free to copy, publish or modify the Source, but they must
adhere the "Natural Language Processing Open Source License" (License
Version 1.0) terms and conditions.
资源提供者不承诺提供任何技术支持，也不会对使用者由于使用本资源而造成的任何后果（不论是直接的还是间接的）承担责任。详细信息请参阅“自然语言处理开放资源许可证”中的具体条款。
The owner of Source doesn't provide any technical support, nor liable
to Users for any lost or damage that cause by the Source.
一份“自然语言处理开放资源许可证”的文本拷贝会随同本资源一起发布。如果没有，请访问“中文自然语言处理开放平台(http://www.nlp.org.cn)”以获得一份完整的许可证文本。
You can find the complete "Natural Language Processing Open Source
License" file that come with the distribution of the Source. If you
couldn't find it, please visit Chinese Natural Language Processing
open platform (http://www.nlp.org.cn) to obtain a complete License
copy.
- o - o - o -
Cheers
--
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java
I live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er
I work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc
I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug
Re: license problem about contributing lucene Chinese analyzer
Posted by Gao Pinker <xi...@gmail.com>.
I found the license here:
http://www.nlp.org.cn/docs/download.php?proj_id=6&prog_id=1
But it's in Chinese, so let me translate the main part:
1~4. mostly the same as GPL,
3.You can use, copy and spread these resource freely, but you should *keep
its integrity, and keep this license with the resource*.
5. When you include these resource in your product or software, and sell it
to your customers, you should *notice the customers obviously that you are
using these resources*, in the mean time, notice the author in paper. (I'm
not selling my product, right?)
6. If these resources are included in your research project, and you want to
publish your research product, you should *notice obviously that you are
using the resource*, and in the mean time, notice the author in email or
paper. (I am including it in my open source project, Am I using his resource
with a research project? )
7. You can change or optimize the resources, but you should *keep its
integrity*, that's to say, *the original edition can be restored easily from
your changed edition*. The original author should be written in the changed
edition.
I think their license sounds a little like apache license, as it allows
commercial usage.
On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 12:12 PM, Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 9:06 AM, Gao Pinker <xi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > The problem is:
> > This Analyzer contains two packages, the source code and the lexical
> > dictionary. I want to publish the source code using Apache license, but
> the
> > lexical dictionary which is under an ambigus license was not create by
> me.
> > So, can I only submit the source code to lucene contribution repository,
> and
> > make a text reference to the dictionary to let the users download it from
> > its google code site? Will there be any conflict with apache license?
>
> Can you provide a link to the lexical dictionary's license?
>
> Cheers
> --
> Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
> http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java
>
> I live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er
> I work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc
> I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>
>
Re: license problem about contributing lucene Chinese analyzer
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 9:06 AM, Gao Pinker <xi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The problem is:
> This Analyzer contains two packages, the source code and the lexical
> dictionary. I want to publish the source code using Apache license, but the
> lexical dictionary which is under an ambigus license was not create by me.
> So, can I only submit the source code to lucene contribution repository, and
> make a text reference to the dictionary to let the users download it from
> its google code site? Will there be any conflict with apache license?
Can you provide a link to the lexical dictionary's license?
Cheers
--
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java
I live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er
I work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc
I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org