This issue was discussed during OntologySummit2008. (01)
We have a IPR panel session planned (but not scheduled yet) for OOR
that is coming up soon. (02)
Please stay tuned. (03)
Regards. =ppy
-- (04)
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 10:26 AM, Cameron Ross <cross@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> One of the things that needs to be considered is the Licensing model to be
> used for ontologies contained within the (an?) OOR. I'm assuming that the
> intent is to establish a corpus of ontologies that will promote their use
> within both commercial and non-commercial applications. The Eclipse Public
> License, the Mozilla Public License and the Apache License are
> all amiable to this goal. However, ontology artifacts are more like data
> than software source code, so these licenses don't necessarily apply well to
> ontology artifacts. The OpenCyc ontology is released under the Creative
> Commons Attribution 3.0 license
> (see http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcode). Meanwhile, Adam
> Pease has suggested using the GNU Free Documentation License
> (see http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html).
> Should the OOR dictate a particular licensing model?
>
> Cameron.
> --
> Kojeware Corporation (05)
_________________________________________________________________
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/sio-dev/
Join Community: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/sio-dev/
Unsubscribe: mailto:sio-dev-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/SIO/
Community Wiki:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SharingIntegratingOntologies (06)
|