[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Non-copyrightable work with non-free license.

Charles Plessy writes ("Non-copyrightable work with non-free license."):
> in at least two of my packages, bioperl and emboss, the test suite contains
> protein sequence files from the UniProt database, which is distributed under
> the non-free CC Attribution-NoDerivs license.  Through a private discussion I
> had with their helpdesk, my understanding of their position is that they are
> trying to enforce the equivalent of a trademark.

Can you get them to say something more public and would be a useful
clarification ?  It would be better to explicitly agree with them that
what we (and our users and derivatives) want to do is OK, than to
possibly get involved in some kind of dispute with them.

> Nevertheless, facts such as protein sequences are not copyrightable.  This is
> somewhat confirmed by the UniProt consortium itself on their website
> (http://www.uniprot.org/help/license), and my conclusion is that, in isolation
> from  the rest of the UniProt database, the records in the test suites of
> BioPerl and EMBOSS are not copyrightable.

But having said the above, I agree with your approach.


Reply to: