Hi
If we did copy the worst case scenario is apparently that we get
served with a "Cease and Desist" or a "Take down" notice....
...
Plus the chance of being caught out is very small...
..
If we don't copy and DO the translations ourselves and the result is
much the same as the Apache one then wouldn't that be considered a
copy anyway?
...so, i think that in this case it is worth taking the risk because the
chance of it being a problem is fairly tiny and it's very easy to fix
if there is a problem.
(IANAL either)
I think we should be careful about basing our policy on a quick cost
vs. benefit risk analysis. If a licensing question arises in the
course of our work, I propose that we try to resolve the particulars
first and then copy code/documentation/media after we've gotten our
ducks in a solid row.
Unless otherwise stated, the FAQ pages on the OOo Wiki are under the
PDL ( http://www.openoffice.org/licenses/PDL.html ). The PDL license
wasn't added to every FAQ page for various reasons that made marginal
sense at the time.
Clayton -- Is there a way that the correct license could be added to
those webpages and/or a note could be put somewhere online on the
openoffice.org website that confirms the licensing? It would just
make the whole process of verifying licenses before copying content
much cleaner.
FWIW, I'm not sure that the PDL is compatible with CC-BY-SA 3.0 (the
license of the TDF Wiki):
https://creativecommons.org/compatiblelicenses
https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/User:Qubit/license
Thanks,
--R