This is the mail archive of the glibc-bugs@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

[Bug localedata/11213] localedata licencing issues


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11213

--- Comment #24 from help at softwarefreedom dot org 2012-07-16 18:50:27 UTC ---
On 07/16/2012 04:55 AM, Keld Simonsen wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 08:13:31PM -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>> Hi Keld,
>>
>> Keld Simonsen wrote[1]:
>>
>>> Hmm, I contributed a number of locales. I always assumed that there was a
>>> copyright to each of them.
>>> I do hold a masters in legislate law.
>> [lots of helpful background snipped, including the intent of the
>> original notice]
>>
>> Thanks much for this.  I'm cc-ing the SFLC since I'm not sure they
>> automatically receive mails to that bug tracker.
>>
>> My guess is that the FSF's concerns that prompted the "this type of
>> thing isn't copyrightable" answer were USA-centric.  If I remember
>> correctly, in some jurisdictions outside the United States, the
>> eligibility of a work for copyright is based on the amount of work put
>> into it (as you remind me), while in the United States it's based on a
>> concept of creativity.
> 
> I claim that there is a lot of creativity in how the locales are written, at least
> the big ones.  As said one of my intial works were 100 pages of the POSIX.2 standard.
> And then the locales grew even further, with the advent of full ISO 10646 (Unicode)
> coverage and ISO TR 14652 extra categories.  There is a lot of design and ideas, 
> and a lot of design criteria in the locales. Including a number of theoretical landmarks,
> and something that could have been patentetd, if somebody were inclined to do such nasty things:-)
> And IMHO that has resulted in a system that still has a number of advantages over
> what big players in the market have done for i18n. 
> 
> And then there is compilation copyright according to the Berne convention - maybe you
> don't hold copyright on the data, but you hold copyright on the presentation on it and the
> collection of the combination of the data.
> 
> I would say in juridical terms it would not be safe to assume that there is no copyright on
> the locales (and charmaps and repertoiremaps).
> 
> Best regards
> keld


The Software Freedom Law Center has received an email from you sent to
help@softwarefreedom.org.  We look forward to helping you in any way we
can, but before we can do that we need to make sure that you understand
that your email to us does not create an attorney-client relationship
with us and any information you send us will not be considered
confidential or privileged.  If you understand that, just reply to this
message by keeping the text of this paragraph and adding "Understood"
and we will respond to your email shortly.  However, if your message
contains any information that you would like to be considered
confidential or privileged (in other words, you do not want it to be
considered public information), please respond to this message with
"Delete my message" or just "Delete."  We understand that this procedure
may seem burdensome, but it is required by law in order to ensure your
rights and the rights of our clients are protected.

--- Comment #25 from help at softwarefreedom dot org 2012-07-16 18:51:49 UTC ---
On 07/16/2012 04:55 AM, Keld Simonsen wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 08:13:31PM -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>> Hi Keld,
>>
>> Keld Simonsen wrote[1]:
>>
>>> Hmm, I contributed a number of locales. I always assumed that there was a
>>> copyright to each of them.
>>> I do hold a masters in legislate law.
>> [lots of helpful background snipped, including the intent of the
>> original notice]
>>
>> Thanks much for this.  I'm cc-ing the SFLC since I'm not sure they
>> automatically receive mails to that bug tracker.
>>
>> My guess is that the FSF's concerns that prompted the "this type of
>> thing isn't copyrightable" answer were USA-centric.  If I remember
>> correctly, in some jurisdictions outside the United States, the
>> eligibility of a work for copyright is based on the amount of work put
>> into it (as you remind me), while in the United States it's based on a
>> concept of creativity.
> 
> I claim that there is a lot of creativity in how the locales are written, at least
> the big ones.  As said one of my intial works were 100 pages of the POSIX.2 standard.
> And then the locales grew even further, with the advent of full ISO 10646 (Unicode)
> coverage and ISO TR 14652 extra categories.  There is a lot of design and ideas, 
> and a lot of design criteria in the locales. Including a number of theoretical landmarks,
> and something that could have been patentetd, if somebody were inclined to do such nasty things:-)
> And IMHO that has resulted in a system that still has a number of advantages over
> what big players in the market have done for i18n. 
> 
> And then there is compilation copyright according to the Berne convention - maybe you
> don't hold copyright on the data, but you hold copyright on the presentation on it and the
> collection of the combination of the data.
> 
> I would say in juridical terms it would not be safe to assume that there is no copyright on
> the locales (and charmaps and repertoiremaps).
> 
> Best regards
> keld


The Software Freedom Law Center has received an email from you sent to
help@softwarefreedom.org.  We look forward to helping you in any way we
can, but before we can do that we need to make sure that you understand
that your email to us does not create an attorney-client relationship
with us and any information you send us will not be considered
confidential or privileged.  If you understand that, just reply to this
message by keeping the text of this paragraph and adding "Understood"
and we will respond to your email shortly.  However, if your message
contains any information that you would like to be considered
confidential or privileged (in other words, you do not want it to be
considered public information), please respond to this message with
"Delete my message" or just "Delete."  We understand that this procedure
may seem burdensome, but it is required by law in order to ensure your
rights and the rights of our clients are protected.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]