Re: legal questions regarding machine learning models

2009-05-27 Thread Mark Weyer
> > This looks very similar to distributing a picture which is a 2D > > rendering of a 3D model without distributing the original model. This is > > already accepted in the archive, and the reason is that a 2D picture is > > its own source, and can serve as a base for modified versions this way. >

Re: legal questions regarding machine learning models

2009-05-27 Thread Mark Weyer
> I mentioned Voxforge in my previous email. Their goal is to use their > free spech data to train models with HTK and use the models with > Julius. You can get the source code of HTK after registration on their > website but the license has severe restrictions so HTK is not free > software. Juliu

Re: legal questions regarding machine learning models

2009-05-27 Thread Josselin Mouette
Le mercredi 27 mai 2009 à 00:36 +0200, Francesco Poli a écrit : > > Of course, the decision is up to the FTP masters, but I think this > > should be accepted for the sake of consistency with things we already > > cannot decently exclude from the archive. > > I instead think that FTP masters should

Re: legal questions regarding machine learning models

2009-05-27 Thread Miriam Ruiz
2009/5/27 Mark Weyer : >> > This looks very similar to distributing a picture which is a 2D >> > rendering of a 3D model without distributing the original model. This is >> > already accepted in the archive, and the reason is that a 2D picture is >> > its own source, and can serve as a base for mod

Re: legal questions regarding machine learning models

2009-05-27 Thread Mark Weyer
> > I agree with you. In particular, in many cases a single 3D model is used > > to create many 2D images. If you don't have the model, you need to do > > the modification many times. > > And then there is the case of increasing the resolution... > I don't know if it would be technically possible

Re: legal questions regarding machine learning models

2009-05-27 Thread Steve Langasek
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 10:33:52AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote: > > Disclaimers, of course: IANADD, TINASOTODP (and IANAL, TINLA). > If you really feel the urge to add meaningless acronyms to all your > emails, please do so in your signature. Better yet: he should recognize that the reason he

Re: legal questions regarding machine learning models

2009-05-27 Thread Mark Weyer
I know I should not reply to polemic posts because it is just one step short of troll-feeding, but anyway: > I suggest you start your own distribution, in which you won’t ship: > * xfonts-* (bitmap renderings of non-free vector fonts) I agree that these do not belong in a free distribution

Re: legal questions regarding machine learning models

2009-05-27 Thread Francesco Poli
On Wed, 27 May 2009 11:25:09 +0900 Mathieu Blondel wrote: > On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 7:36 AM, Francesco Poli wrote: > > > I think that in the case of machine learning models, source form is > > even more clearly distinct from compiled object. > > We can consider an artificial neural network, for i

Re: legal questions regarding machine learning models

2009-05-27 Thread Francesco Poli
On Wed, 27 May 2009 11:36:55 +0200 Mark Weyer wrote: [...] > Extremes: I do not agree with this classification of my view. > I value a free game for the fact, that I can fool around with the source > to make it "better". Adding features, levels, characters. If this means > that I have to add long

Re: legal questions regarding machine learning models

2009-05-27 Thread Francesco Poli
On Wed, 27 May 2009 10:33:52 +0200 Josselin Mouette wrote: > Le mercredi 27 mai 2009 à 00:36 +0200, Francesco Poli a écrit : [...] > > I instead think that FTP masters should change their minds about 2D > > images rendered from 3D models. > > I suggest you start your own distribution, in which yo

Re: legal questions regarding machine learning models

2009-05-27 Thread Francesco Poli
On Wed, 27 May 2009 11:37:56 +0200 Steve Langasek wrote: > On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 10:33:52AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote: > > > Disclaimers, of course: IANADD, TINASOTODP (and IANAL, TINLA). > > > If you really feel the urge to add meaningless acronyms to all your > > emails, please do so in y

Appropriate use of debian-legal (was: legal questions regarding machine learning models)

2009-05-27 Thread Ben Finney
Steve Langasek writes: > [specific person]'s posts are an inappropriate use of this mailing > list and not productive, and [they should] stop posting. On what are you basing your judgement of “appropriate use of this mailing list”? Can you give specific examples of posts you think are inappropri

Re: legal questions regarding machine learning models

2009-05-27 Thread Mathieu Blondel
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 5:51 AM, Francesco Poli wrote: >> Afterall, a model is just a big set of numbers. > > Machine code is just a long sequence of 0s and 1s... I knew someone would come up with this :-) Let me summarize and please correct me if I'm wrong. * The model alone can be distribute

Re: legal questions regarding machine learning models

2009-05-27 Thread Ben Finney
Mathieu Blondel writes: > * The model alone can be distributed under a free license. > - As a consequence of this, neither the original data nor the program > to build the model need to be free. Going by the FSF definition of a free work, specifically freedom 1 and 3 http://www.gnu.org/philosoph