Re: [Fedora-legal-list] NIST license

2009-04-15 Thread Jerry James
Here is the NIST license for another piece of their software, SCTK. It says that the software is public domain, but also includes an explicit disclaimer. Is that still Public Domain for spec file purposes? This software was developed at the National Institute of Standards and Technology by

Re: [Fedora-legal-list] NIST license

2009-04-15 Thread Tom spot Callaway
On 04/15/2009 01:14 PM, Jerry James wrote: Here is the NIST license for another piece of their software, SCTK. It says that the software is public domain, but also includes an explicit disclaimer. Is that still Public Domain for spec file purposes? Yes. Works commissioned by employees of the

Re: [Fedora-legal-list] NIST license

2009-04-13 Thread Jerry James
On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 3:59 PM, Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com wrote: NIST's statement above seems to only apply to their World Wide Web pages. They're not declaring it public domain either, they're granting explicit rights to distribute and copy. It is notably more complicated to put

Re: [Fedora-legal-list] NIST license

2009-04-13 Thread Tom spot Callaway
On 04/13/2009 01:08 PM, Jerry James wrote: Yeah, probably. I'm on so many mailing lists already, how much pain could one more cause me? :-) Hmmm, why doesn't this list appear on http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate ? Dunno. It is there now. :) ~spot

[Fedora-legal-list] NIST license

2009-04-10 Thread Jerry James
Re: the recent speech recognition thread on Fedora-devel, I am looking at packaging up a few tools from http://www.nist.gov/speech/tools/, SPHERE in particular. However, the distribution contains no mention of a license. A query about this was answered with a pointer to this page:

Re: [Fedora-legal-list] NIST license

2009-04-10 Thread Tom spot Callaway
On 04/09/2009 12:09 PM, Jerry James wrote: Re: the recent speech recognition thread on Fedora-devel, I am looking at packaging up a few tools from http://www.nist.gov/speech/tools/, SPHERE in particular. However, the distribution contains no mention of a license. A query about this was