From arj@nvg.org Wed May 03 07:53:58 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list llg-board); Wed, 03 May 2006 07:53:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sabre-wulf.nvg.ntnu.no ([129.241.210.67]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.61) (envelope-from ) id 1FbIjb-0000eE-54 for llg-board@lojban.org; Wed, 03 May 2006 07:53:56 -0700 Received: from hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no (hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no [129.241.210.68]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by sabre-wulf.nvg.ntnu.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE23B94799 for ; Wed, 3 May 2006 16:53:30 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 16:53:30 +0200 (CEST) From: Arnt Richard Johansen X-X-Sender: arj@hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no To: llg-board@lojban.org Subject: [llg-board] PLEASE READ: Re: Re: Archivist: PD docs... Which, exactly? In-Reply-To: <4457AF02.6040805@lojban.org> Message-ID: References: <20060424172644.GK2842@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <4457AF02.6040805@lojban.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-NVG-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-NVG-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-From: arj@nvg.org X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-archive-position: 100 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: llg-board-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: llg-board-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: arj@nvg.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: llg-board@lojban.org X-list: llg-board Attention, board members! We are now voting on Bob's proposal on whether to update the wording of http://www.lojban.org/publications/wordlists/public_domain.txt . On Tue, 2 May 2006, Robert LeChevalier wrote: > Robin Lee Powell wrote: >> To which documents, exactly, does >> http://www.lojban.org/publications/wordlists/public_domain.txt >> apply? >> [...] > > Here is the resolution that was passed at the 1991 annual meeting >> [...] >> 2) The following are non-exhaustive lists of materials in each group: >> Group A: JL and LK issues from 5 on; draft textbook lessons; >> word lists; language definition materials; ancillary materials. >> Group B: obsolete JL issues; the (as yet unwritten) textbook; >> the (as yet unwritten) dictionary. >> Group C: Logflash for PC and Mac; LLG Lojban Parser (in beta release); >> lujvo-maker; random sentence generator. >> >> 3) LLG will provide all materials in Group A for electronic distribution >> free of charge. All materials, except word lists and other language >> definition materials, will be copyrighted using a copyright notice >> essentially similar to the one attached to this draft policy. >> [...] > > We never say what constitutes "language definition materials", though it > was discussed in the annual meeting, but at the very least they include > > all OFFICIAL word lists - gismu and cmavo and rafsi > (I am not all of the lists on the tiki list are "official", and I'm not > sure we can speak for the authors. I presume Jorge did the Spanish list > for example, and it was never adopted as official and I'm not even sure > anyone did an independent check. As author he would have to release it > either to us or to the public domain). Ah. That clears up a lot of things. The actual problem Robin is trying to solve, is whether or not he is in the wrong to say that everything that currently is in Jbovlaste is PD. As I see it, the following parts *are* PD: - Imports from gismu.txt (by virtue of being official) - Imports from cmavo.txt (by virtue of being official) - User contributions (by virtue of having accepted the Jbovlaste PD clause) And the following are somewhat of a grey zone: - Import from NORALUJV.txt (it is not baselined, but is it official?) Do I understand it correctly that the intent of this board decision was that *all* LLG publications, including software, should either be covered by the General Licence, or be in the public domain? > Whatever is done, the public domain announcement actually on the website > should be made current. We shouldn't have a grebyn.com or digex email > address, or to the Planned Languages Server anywhere on the website in > any materials someone might think of as current rather than archival. > If necessary, I move a change to the policy to make it current, > delegating to the Secretary to actually produce and update the text, > clarifying as appropriate, and submitting the result to a formal vote > only because something this fundamental should have a formal vote. I am of the opinion that these changes are just minor updates, but of course, if one board member calls for a vote, we will have a vote. > (assuming we have a Board meeting in progress with a quorum - so far as > I recall, we never convened one after somewhat irregularly electing a > new President). It is the view of the President that the Board meeting is in session continuously, as per John Cowan's mail on Mon, 19 Dec 2005 02:06:40 -0500. Of course, I will make sure that everyone has chimed in on the matter, as per article 4, section 7. -- Arnt Richard Johansen http://arj.nvg.org/ XP kjennes ... sprengt. Som om noe har eksplodert der.