Federico, Hugo, Good to hear from you. I’m cc’ing Anne in here from the Unicode counsel side.
I can reply on a couple of technical points. - As far as I know, WMF remains a member. - There is a new SPDX identifier in progress for the v3 license, so that will be rolled out when available. - Please take a look at the wording at the bottom of the README.md on https://github.com/unicode-org/icu4x which was written to address some of the concerns about the openness of the license. See if it is helpful, perhaps (to Anne) that is a good reason to roll that wording to all repositories. Regards, and happy 2024, Steven El El sáb, dic. 30, 2023 a la(s) 4:14 a.m., Federico Leva (Nemo) <nemow...@gmail.com <mailto:nemow...@gmail.com>> escribió: > I was pinged on a Unicode repository > https://github.com/unicode-org/unilex/issues/10#issuecomment-1872496490 > asking for a WMF perspective on license compatibility. I gave my > personal answer but I'm notifying the list in case someone does want to > answer in name of WMF as Unicode member/user. (Also cc'ing Hugo, Stephen > and Richard as I mentioned them.) > > As my answer turned out to be rather long I'll copy it here for the > archives' benefit. > > ---- > > @srl295 Thanks for the ping. I wasn't aware of this issue but I'll give > a quick reply. I've only read the discussion above and the README. I > can't speak for WMF, let alone Unicode (I don't remember whether WMF is > even a member now), but I can tell about the usage of Unicode components > in MediaWiki software and Wikimedia wikis. > > The issue description highlights some confusion on the licensing of this > project. Meanwhile the LICENSE has been updated to the Unicode license > v3 which has been recently approved by OSI on 2023-11-17: > https://opensource.org/license/unicode-license-v3/ . So there's no doubt > this repository is opensource. Maybe this can be explicitly mentioned on > the README, as not everyone is able to recognize the license text as its > own OSI-approved Unicode v3 license. > > MediaWiki can and does use software under Unicode license all the time, > for example in the [CLDR > extension](https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:CLDR), which is > primarily GPLv2, under the understanding that the CLDR data inside was > under a BSD-like license. (Apertium linguistic data is also > [usually](https://wiki.apertium.org/wiki/Contributing_to_an_existing_pair#Consider_contributing_your_improved_lexical_data) > > under GPL.) As long as Unilex can be used in GPL software, there are > probably ways it can benefit all Wikimedia wikis through MediaWiki. > > However @hugolpz seems most concerned about usage in Wikidata and other > Wikimedia wikis _content_. From the README it sounds like this > repository mostly wants to collect uncopyrightable factual information. > In the EU, there might still be problems with database rights. A general > opinion from the WMF on how to handle these is at > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikilegal/Database_Rights . In short, > it's complicated, and it's easier to incorporate a dataset into Wikidata > when it's already under CC-0. If there's some doubt on whether the data/ > directory here as a whole is a dataset > > If you want to cooperate with Wikidata lexemes in the future, it's worth > considering how to make it easier. As for LinguaLibre, as far I > understand it helps produce some recording which might be considered > copyrightable, and it wants its outputs to be available under CC BY-SA, > so it benefits from its sources being as permissive as possible. > > Finally, I see that [many > files](https://github.com/search?q=repo%3Aunicode-org%2Funilex+SPDX-License-Identifier&type=code) > > carry a `SPDX-License-Identifier: Unicode-DFS-2016` header, which makes > it easier to follow the [Reuse](https://reuse.software/) guidelines. > Note Richard Fontana's suggestion for trivial files at > https://github.com/fsfe/reuse-docs/issues/62#issuecomment-1200305896 > (and my personal opinion below it). > > So in conclusion my personal suggestions are: > * mark the repository even more clearly as being under OSI-approved > license Unicode v3; > * keep marking the individual files copyright status, and consider even > more permissive licenses like MIT-0 (or 0BSD or CC-0) when adding > uncopyrightable files; > * keep in mind possible copyright needs for Wikidata and Wikimedia > Commons in the future, and ask help from WMF legal (le...@wikimedia.org > <mailto:le...@wikimedia.org>) > on any possible/needed clarifications for CC-0 and CC BY-SA > compatibility (fyi @slaporte). > > ---- > > Cheers, > Federico
_______________________________________________ Mediawiki-i18n mailing list -- mediawiki-i18n@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe send an email to mediawiki-i18n-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
