On Sun, 18 Jul 2010, Siegfried-Angel Gevatter Pujals wrote: > 2. In the event you provide to any third party all or any portion of > the Software, whether for copying, duplication, adaptation, > modification, preparation of a derivative work, aggregation with > another program, insertion into another program, or other use, you > shall affix the following copyright notice and all terms and > conditions of this license (both the Japanese original and English > translation) as set forth herein, without any revision or change > whatsoever.
This is a lawyer bomb, as it doesn't describe where and how we are supposed to affix the copyright notice. [I *think* they mean that it should be included with the software, but it could also mean that it needs to be written on the CD, which is a non-starter.] Alternatively, this vagueness may be a consequence of an imprecise English translation; I can't read Japanese (and certainly not legal Japanese) well enough to state one way or the other. > 3. When you publish or present any results by using the Software, > you must explicitly mention your use of "Large Vocabulary Continuous > Speech Recognition Engine Julius". There's no reason to require this; it makes the software non-free as it is clearly a use restriction. [A suggestion that people cite the software is almost certainly enough, and should accomplish what the author wishes in most cases.] > 5. This license of use of the Software shall be governed by the laws > of Japan, and the Kyoto District Court shall have exclusive primary > jurisdiction with respect to all disputes arising with respect > thereto. This sounds like proscribed venue; that's not something that I would ever agree to in a software licence without thought. However, I'm not sure what the current consensus is about the freeness of such clauses. > 6. Inquiries for support or maintenance of the Software, or inquiries > concerning this license of use besides the conditions above, may be > sent to Julius project team, Nagoya Institute of Technology, or > Kawahara Lab., Kyoto University. Point 6 doesn't belong in the license; it should go in a readme or somewhere else. [It doesn't affect the freeness of the license, however.] Don Armstrong -- [A] theory is falsifiable [(and therefore scientific) only] if the class of its potential falsifiers is not empty. -- Sir Karl Popper _The Logic of Scientific Discovery_ ยง21 http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
