On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 10:36 PM, Nadav Har'El <n...@math.technion.ac.il>wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 03, 2012, Orna Agmon Ben-Yehuda wrote about "Re: Announce: > Hspell 1.2": > > Regarding the license - AGPL sounds like a great idea, but It is hard for > > me to imagine > > gmail, for example, with a "powered by Hspell" button. I am afraid they > > will prefer to keep > > using the outdated version 1.1 rather than do this. > > I believe that Google is actually still using Hspell 0.9, not even > 1.1... > > If you look very carefully in Google Docs (I can't even recall how I > found it), you may find a link to this page: > http://www.google.com/google-d-s/legal.html > Would it have killed them to also mention Hspell - and not just free > software whose license demanded attribution? > (if you're wondering whether Google *really* uses Hspell, they do admit > it in one place: http://code.google.com/opensource/patches.html). > > Moreover, I definitely don't expect a "powered by Hspell" button on the > Google home page ;-) But what is so strange in expecting a link to > Hspell while the Hebrew spellchecker is running, or in the spellchecking > help page in Hebrew? >From the last link it is not clear to me that Google actually use Hspell as software. They say they use "data from Hspell to implement Hebrew spell-checking". This may be construed as using their own - or 3rd party - spell-checker while utilizing your "data", whatever that means (word list?). I don't know, of course, and I am not familiar with Hspell's structure to even decide for myself whether it can be divided into "data" and "software". I would tend to believe that Google carefully weigh such formulae, even if they are not really afraid of your thousand-dollars-an-hour lawyer. -- Oleg Goldshmidt | p...@goldshmidt.org <o...@goldshmidt.org>
_______________________________________________ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
