[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Org schemas we talked to be non-free, was: [ELPA] New package: repol

From: Dmitry Gutov
Subject: Re: Org schemas we talked to be non-free, was: [ELPA] New package: repology.el
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2021 00:55:42 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0

On 26.01.2021 18:31, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
There are several methods available for that, but the simplest one is
to define new elements using the ones defined in the original schema.
Wouldn't that make it a derivative work?
I don't know.  What if it does?
The original schema's license can impose restrictions on that.
Does it, though?

The OASIS schemas we're talking about have a license blurb that starts with "All right reserved", and then only mentiones permissions to do derivative works "that comment on or otherwise explain it or assist in its implementation", which doesn't seem to cover derivative schemas for, say, experimentation.

Of course, many cases could be covered by Fair Use, and even those that don't, the likelihood of being sued is vanishingly low, and the main goal of theirs seems to be to avoid being misrepresented by others (e.g. by removing the authorship or keeping it but changing the contents somehow maliciously), but as a matter of license, permission for arbitrary derivative works seems absent.

IANAL, consult your lawyer, etc.

And if it does, how useful is such a schema?

Just as a way to describe a certain fixed format, I guess?

The wording of their rules seems pretty bureaucratic. It seems you need to join OASIS (or work in a company that is part of it) to safely contribute to any new version of the format. Which is disappointing.

Again, IANAL, and perhaps there are some better explanations in their policy somewhere on the website. I just could find them so far.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]