[Kde-accessibility] SSML and the GPL

[Bill Haneman]

As far as I can see it's OK now.  In the past, before the RF issues were
clarified (and especially during the w3c's flirtation with 
"non-discriminatory" licenses), there were concerns.

When I wrote my email about SSML/XML licensing issues, my intent was
basically "we should make sure we're using a GPL license here"; my
recollection that of the several XML/speech variants, some had serious
issues.  I now recall that SSML is the one that we (GNOME folks) decided
was OK at the time.  I think we've done our basic homework on SSML
licensing issues now, and it does look OK to me too (IANAL of course). 
So barring getting an actual lawyer to review[1], I think we can agree
on SSML as the XML markup flavor[2] and more on.

- Bill

[1] pardon the pun
[2] we may consider whether it's feasible to support the whole spec, or
just a subset, for our API, and how to deal with engines that provide
incomplete support.


 On Sat, 2004-10-30 at 20:24, Kenneth Wimer wrote:
> * Paul Giannaros <ceruleanblaze at gmail.com> [Oct 30. 2004 21:13]:
> > It boils down to the fact that it may not be GPL compatible and, as
> > Gary is concerned, not allow it to be included as a debian package. I
> > too think it seems to be ok to continue, but I'll wait for more
> > information first.
> > 
> 
> THe idea that someone might sue you in the future for patent
> infringement is an important one, but quite different from that of "can
> I release my work as GPL". Perhaps there is someone who could take care
> of such issues, who has a legal background?
> 
> Bye,
> Kenneth
> 
> -- 
> SUSE LINUX - a Novell business
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> Scheinbare Rechtschreibfehler beruhen auf einer individuellen
> Rechtschreibreform
> 
> _______________________________________________
> kde-accessibility mailing list
> kde-accessibility at kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-accessibility