Issue 74285 - distribution of hyph_bg_BG.dic violates the LPPL
Summary: distribution of hyph_bg_BG.dic violates the LPPL
Status: CLOSED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: lingucomponent
Classification: Code
Component: other (show other issues)
Version: OOo 2.2
Hardware: All All
: P3 Trivial (vote)
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: issues@lingucomponent
QA Contact: issues@lingucomponent
URL:
Keywords: oooqa
Depends on:
Blocks: 74283
  Show dependency tree
 
Reported: 2007-02-07 16:37 UTC by doko
Modified: 2017-05-20 09:01 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

See Also:
Issue Type: DEFECT
Latest Confirmation in: ---
Developer Difficulty: ---

Attachments
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this issue.
Description doko 2007-02-07 16:37:39 UTC 
hyph_bg_BG.dic, as found in
http://ftp.services.openoffice.org/pub/OpenOffice.org/contrib/dictionaries/hyph_bg_BG.zip

is derived from a file licensed under the LPPL, but it violates at least
paragraph 6d of the LPPL.

Needed information: Either distribute the original file as well, or (better)
name the file and the version of the file which the derived work is based on.
The LPPL requests "Information that is sufficient to obtain a complete,
unmodified copy of the Work."

The LPPL can be found at http://www.latex-project.org/lppl.txt
Comment 1 jjmckenzie 2007-02-20 01:18:58 UTC 
Hmmmm.  I thought that OpenOffice.org was distributed under the LGPL, not the
LPPL.  Anyone care to confirm?

James McKenzie
Comment 2 tml 2007-10-11 13:02:08 UTC 
> I thought that OpenOffice.org was distributed under the LGPL

Sure, yes. It's some hyphenation patterns
(http://ftp.stardiv.de/pub/OpenOffice.org/contrib/dictionaries/hyph_bg_BG.zip in
this issue's case) that allegedly are derived works of files licensed under the
LPPL. Whether that actually is the case I have no idea. Nor do I know Bulgarian
copyright law... Somebody should contact Anton Zinoviev <anton@lml.bas.bg> which
the README file says to be the copyright holder of the original bghyphen.tex.
Comment 3 stefan.baltzer 2008-10-30 11:38:23 UTC 
SBA: Confirming 21 sub-issues of issue 74283 at once.
I believe that doko did the right thing and could/should have set the issues to
NEW right after submitting (Just like all "CanConfirm rights owners" do when
submitting issues)

Thus I beieve that taking a second look at EACH of these files is not worth the
effort. The state "Unconfirmed" is irritating queries used in daily QA work.
Comment 4 Mechtilde 2009-12-19 20:51:45 UTC 
grap
Comment 5 Mechtilde 2009-12-19 20:56:22 UTC 
this version isn't in the source code of OOO320_m8
Comment 6 Pedro Giffuni 2011-12-02 04:49:07 UTC 
The dictionary component was removed as part of the IP clearance process.