W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > March 2009

Re: Draft W3C Excerpt License (Re: WG Decision - spec license use cases)

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 11:59:25 -0800
Cc: public-html@w3.org
Message-id: <FF69CE3C-7028-4C4F-AE40-514CF9CD5B9C@apple.com>
To: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>

It is not clear to me that this license addresses the use case of spec  
excerpts (including IDL) in LGPL-licensed software. The LGPL does not  
allow additional restrictions on an LGPL-licensed work, including  
field-of-use restrictions. I am by no means a legal expert, but the  
"no derivative specifications" clause seems prima facie incompatible  
with the LGPL. Has the W3C sought a legal opinion regarding  
compatibility of this license with the MPL, LGPL and GPL?

Regards,
Maciej


On Mar 4, 2009, at 2:07 PM, Philippe Le Hegaret wrote:

> Dear HTML Working Group,
>
> This message is in response to "WG Decision - spec license use
> cases" [1].
>
> In response to requests from developers to make it easier
> to include portions of W3C specifications in software documentation,
> bug reports, code, and test cases, W3C have drafted a new
> Excerpt & Citation License:
>   http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/2008/06-excerpt-license
>
> The W3C Excerpt & Citation License would apply automatically to all  
> W3C
> Documents that carry the W3C Document license if adopted.
>
> Information about expected use cases and how to use the license
> is available in a supporting document:
>   http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/2008/06-excerpt-copyright
>
> Comments on the draft are welcome to site-policy@w3.org before
> **18 March 2009**.
>
> It is my understanding that this current draft addresses the use cases
> presented by the HTML Working Group at [1], with the exception of
> continuing/forking the development of the WG deliverables in a non-W3C
> venue whether or not W3C and/or the HTML WG cease operations (the last
> two use cases in Henri's list). Uses like forking of a specification
> would remain prohibited to protect the due process and the consensus
> found in a chartered Working Group. I will continue to investigate the
> possibilities of addressing this last need (in particular during the
> upcoming Advisory Committee meeting), but the Group may wish to  
> comment
> on the draft in the meantime.
>
> Philippe
>
> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Feb/0388.html
>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 5 March 2009 20:00:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:02 UTC