pkriens | 9 Nov 18:47 2005

License to a file only available in Mozilla classic

We have been using the ifc.jar file that used to be available from
Netscape. We have some lawyers asking questions and have to figure out
under which license the file is distributed.

ifc11.jar can be found in

Is this file available under NPL or also under MPL/GPL/LGPL?

Just from general interest, what happened to ifc.jar, it seems to be
used by later versions of mozilla but I cannot find it and LXR seems to
not index JAR files.
YAMAGUCHI Satoru | 14 Nov 09:15 2005

Creative Commons for documents


I would like to find out the following points regarding the licensing of the
documentations at under Creative Commons
Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0.

* Why did you choose this license among other licenses?
* How did you get permission from the contributors to license the
documents under CC?
* Are you going to relicense the documents under Creative Commons
Attribution-ShareAlike 2.5 in the future? If so, how are you going to
obtain permission to relicense the documents from the contributors?

The reason for these questions is that we (the Mozilla Japan translation
division)  to license the translated documents under Creative Commons,
so that the translated materials can be migrated to Mozilla Developer
Center without asking each translator each time they migrate the documents.

However, it is concerned that CC does not explicitly require to display
changes made to the document in its Legal Code. As an extreme example,
it it technically possible to insert a line like "Firefox sucks. Let's
use IE." and distribute that modified document as a document from legally as long as the modifier follows the Legal Code,
namely displaying the names of the original authors and the license terms.

How do you address this type of concern?

My questions might be based on faulty assumptions. If so, please point
that out. I will be grateful.
(Continue reading)