Back to the list( was Any objection to the OFL?)

[machado at SOFTWARELIVRE.ORG]

Hello, there!

I'm trully sorry for so long time in silence. I resume my humble  
participation in this list by answering an old question from Val(see  
Val's message below).

Well, when I sent you guys my script for creating SSS2004 SVG symbols
I licensed only that script. I used GPL[1] for the script and stated
that the symbols license should be checked/obtained from DAC or Sutton
Center. I can't remember the exact term and words. But that  was the
idea.

Since I'm not the one who created IWMA2004 neither work for
them(yet  :) ) I could not license the symbol set.
I could have licensed that png files set(as a derivative work of my
script). But it didn't seem fair to me.
Then I asked Val what would we do and she told me that people like,
Gerard, Steve, Bill and others was investigating this issue.

It was a long and pleasant conversation about this topic some time
ago, through an instant messenger. Thanks again, Val!

I believe that Bill or Gerard said in other emails that we should use
OFL for SSS/IWMA fonts we create. But not software. :) See my argument
[2]
I totally agree with them. Rocha Costa's SW Edit uses GPL, which seems
an appropriate licensed to be used for our softwares.

By the way, I have another small script

I'm sorry, I haven't read the entire email thread on this topic. I may
be missing something.

All the best

[1] http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl.html
[2] http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/index_html#Fonts

Machado
******************************************************
9° Forum Internacional Software Livre - fisl9.0
http://fisl.softwarelivre.org/  - Abril de 2008
Porto Alegre, RS - Brasil
******************************************************



Quoting Valerie Sutton <signwriting at MAC.COM>:

> SignWriting List
> June 6, 2007
>
> Hello Steve!
> Thank you for investigating the issues surrounding the OFL, and thanks
> also to Gerard for suggesting the OFL.
>
> No objection from me...I personally welcome it and think it is a good
> idea. Unless someone else using SignWriting objects...
>
> Steve - I believe you communicated with the OFL people through email,
> is that correct? And I assume they answered all your questions...
>
> I do have a question about the SVG symbols that are already designed by
> Machado in Brazil...
>
> I believe Machado also used a license on his current SVG for the
> SSS-2004, which you can find on this web page:
>
> IMWA Downloads
> http://www.movementwriting.org/symbolbank/IMWA-Downloads.html
>
> Machado told me he has a license on it, but I cannot find the license
> he used...can you find the name of it? I believe it is a free license
> as well...
>
> Machado said he would help us with creating the ISWA-2007 in SVG...I
> assume we will use what is already done, and then add the changes...
>
> Or maybe it is easier to start from scratch based on the new PNGs, I
> don't know...
>
> Will using the OFL for the ISWA-2007 PNGs, create a problem, if we
> choose to use some of the old SVG to create the new ISWA-2007 svg later?
>
> Conflicts between licenses? ;-))
>
> Val ;-)
>
>
> -------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Jun 6, 2007, at 8:23 AM, Steve Slevinski wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> We've been discussing licensing issues for SignWriting.  I think    
>> the Open Font License is ideal for the SignWriting symbol sets.
>>
>> You can read the online version:
>> http://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/page.php?site_id=nrsi&item_id=OFL_web
>>
>> Under the OFL, I do not see any negatives and many positives.  This  
>>   is not a major change compared to what we are doing right now.
>> This licensing is important for widespread adoption in the free and  
>>   open source world as well as the proprietary, commercial world.
>> You will be free to use the symbol sets for any type of writing.     
>> You will be free to use the symbol set with software and include    
>> the symbol set as part of the software.  You will be free to modify  
>>   the symbol set as long as you release the modified symbol set   
>> under  the OFL.  You can redistribute the symbol set almost any way  
>>  you  want.  The main restriction is that you can't sell the font  
>> by   itself.
>>
>> Does anyone have  any concerns?  Please ask questions or read the    
>> license itself.  It's about 1 page long and can be read in about 5   
>>  minutes.
>> http://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/page.php?site_id=nrsi&item_id=OFL_web
>>
>> Regards,
>> -Steve
>>
>
>
>
>



-------------------------------------------------------------
Associacao Software Livre.Org - http://www.softwarelivre.org/


!DSPAM:46706340250131600658594!




----- End forwarded message -----


-------------------------------------------------------------
Associacao Software Livre.Org - http://www.softwarelivre.org/