Recently a package (apx) was found which bundled a font. A discussion with the apx developers can be found at https://github.com/projecthamster/apx/issues/4
The question is whether the apx developer's statement that he received written permission to relicense the font as CC-BY is sufficient, or if Fedora needs to get that proof somehow and include it as %license text.
Thanks,
- J<
And to follow up, here is the original license, in case it's actually acceptable:
http://www.dsg4.com/04/extra/bitmap/about.html
It's a bitmap and almost entirely in Japanese. My Japanese is sufficient to decypher the kana for "bitmap font" and that's about it. But it does say "you may use them as you like" (in English) and that might be sufficient.
- J<
Jason L Tibbitts III wrote on 01/25/2015 06:38 AM:
And to follow up, here is the original license, in case it's actually acceptable:
http://www.dsg4.com/04/extra/bitmap/about.html
It's a bitmap and almost entirely in Japanese. My Japanese is sufficient to decypher the kana for "bitmap font" and that's about it. But it does say "you may use them as you like" (in English) and that might be sufficient.
- J<
This Japanese text says: ------ * These fonts are "free softwares". * You may freely distribute, transfer, reprint these for non-commercial purpose, but it is strictly forbidden to sell these or attach these with commercial-purpose materials without permission by the author. * The author won't take any responsibility for any damage given by using these fonts.
作者の許可 - permission by the author 販売 - sell 営利 目的 - commercial purpose 固く 禁じ - strictly forbidden
So this license is not acceptable.
Regards, Mamoru TASAKA <native Japanese>
"MT" == Mamoru TASAKA mtasaka@fedoraproject.org writes:
MT> This Japanese text says:
Wow, thanks! At least it's clearly unacceptable and we don't have to get into the legal nuances of Japanese translation.
So this falls back to the question of whether the apx developer's statement that upstream relicensed the font is sufficient.
- J<
On 01/24/2015 11:13 PM, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
"MT" == Mamoru TASAKA mtasaka@fedoraproject.org writes:
MT> This Japanese text says:
Wow, thanks! At least it's clearly unacceptable and we don't have to get into the legal nuances of Japanese translation.
So this falls back to the question of whether the apx developer's statement that upstream relicensed the font is sufficient.
While I'd like to have seen some specific documentation supporting the relicensing, I have no reason to doubt the apx upstream in this manner. It is fine for Fedora to consider the font to be CC-BY.
~tom
== Red Hat