Licensing questions (for packaging and use)

[jahvascr...@gmail.com]

Hello,

MathJax is a great tool for rendering maths online :) .

Scribble [1] is a documentation language (think of it as an alternative to LaTeX with HTML output), and I created a package (available at [2]) which allows Scribble users to easily typeset math using MathJax.

For example, one can write the following file, compile it with scribble, and obtain an HTML page which loads the MathJax library to typeset the math.

#lang scribble/manual

@require[scribble-math]

@use-mathjax[]

Let's write some @${m \alpha \tau h} !

I am not a lawyer, and therefore am uncertain concerning licensing issues.

1) I'm minimizing the official MathJax repo [3] and am including it as a subdirectory [4] of the scribble-math package (in order for it to get downloaded by the package manager), keeping the LICENSE file intact inside that MathJax subdirectory.

  Does distributing Mathjax in a subdirectory, with its own license, have an impact on the license of the rest of the scribble-math code or repository? 

2) The scribble-math code instructs scribble to copy the MathJax directory into the output directory, along with the produced HTML file.

  Is this copy a sort of linking which could taint the license of the scribble-math code itself?

  I am not aware of any linking / tainting issues concerning the Apache License v2, these legal terms are vague and subject to interpretation, so I feel it's better to ask at the source.

3) Is there any impact on the license of the source scribble documents which make use of the scribble-math library?

4) The resulting HTML files contain a tiny piece of code which writes a script tag which loads the MathJax.js file.

  Is there any impact on the license of the generated HTML files themselves?

  Is there any impact on the source scribble documents used to generate these files?

5) I am considering the possibility to perform the rendering as a pre-processing step, via MathJax-node. Does the HTML generated by MathJax-node have any licensing impact on the source or HTML documents?

6) The STIX-Web and TeX fonts are included in the MathJax format in HTML-CSS format. Are there any issues related to distributing those, as long as they are left in their respective subfolders, without altering the LICENSE files?

FWIW, currently, the scribble-math code is based on an existing math package for Scribble, and keeps the original license of that former package (LGPLv3), but I might discard the few relevant files and switch the scribble-math code to a Public Domain / CC0 "license".

I would like to make it easier for Scribble users to beautifully typeset math using MathJax, but I wouldn't want this to set up a licensing trap, forcing users to change the license of their documentation (either source or generated HTML). Note that I cannot afford to pay a lawyer to answer these questions, and asking at the source will give a more definitive answer at any rate.

Thank you very much,

Georges Dupéron

[1] http://docs.racket-lang.org/scribble/

[2] https://github.com/jsmaniac/scribble-math

[3] https://github.com/mathjax/MathJax

[4] https://github.com/jsmaniac/scribble-math/tree/master/MathJax

[Peter Krautzberger]

Hi,

First off, I'm not a lawyer and cannot provide legal advice (nor can anyone else at MathJax).

MathJax is licensed under the Apache License v2 and thus the questions can be asked in general about any piece of code licensed this way. 

A good place to start learning aobut it is Apache's FAQ at https://www.apache.org/foundation/license-faq.html as well as https://tldrlegal.com/license/apache-license-2.0-%28apache-2.0%29.

>  Does distributing Mathjax in a subdirectory, with its own license, have an impact on the license of the rest of the scribble-math code or repository? 

No.

>  Is this copy a sort of linking which could taint the license of the scribble-math code itself?

That would depend on the licensing of the scribble-math code. A known problem is that GPL v2 is not compatible with Apache code this way. GPL3 should be fine.

> Is there any impact on the license of the source scribble documents which make use of the scribble-math library?

No, just like Word documents are not affected by Word's licensing.

>   Is there any impact on the license of the generated HTML files themselves?

No. 

>  Is there any impact on the source scribble documents used to generate these files?

No.

>  Does the HTML generated by MathJax-node have any licensing impact on the source or HTML documents?

No.

> Are there any issues related to distributing those, as long as they are left in their respective subfolders, without altering the LICENSE files?

Not as long as you follow the SIL license. Cf., https://tldrlegal.com/license/open-font-license-(ofl)-explained (don't get confused by the renaming requirement -- that only applies when changing the font)

Hope this helps a bit. But again, I'm not a lawyer and if you have concerns you should seek out proper legal counsel.

Regards,

Peter.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MathJax Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to mathjax-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[jahvascr...@gmail.com]

Hi Peter,

Thank you for your answers. It mostly confirms what I hoped, but I prefer asking the developers for their own interpretation rather than making uneducated assumptions about legalese which might disagree with the original intent :) .

Le jeudi 30 mars 2017 08:58:27 UTC+2, Peter Krautzberger a écrit :

>  Is this copy a sort of linking which could taint the license of the scribble-math code itself?

That would depend on the licensing of the scribble-math code. A known problem is that GPL v2 is not compatible with Apache code this way. GPL3 should be fine.

Thanks for the heads-up. Scribble-math is based on LGPLv3 code, so that should be OK. I'll try to discard the older LGPLv3 code at some point, so that scribble-math can be CC0, which should avoid any such problems. I'll also add a mention in the docs concerning this, as I suppose that this issue can extend to the source document (e.g. if it is a literate program under GPLv2, I suppose this could cause problems).

Regards,

Georges Dupéron

[Peter Krautzberger]

Hi Georges,

Glad to have helped.

> I prefer asking the developers for their own interpretation rather than making uneducated assumptions about legalese which might disagree with the original intent :) .

Thanks for doing so. 

While it probably isn't relevant to your project, I would point out that in most countries people other than the developers can sue over license violations (e.g., interest groups, competitors).  That is why we always suggest to seek out proper legal advice.

Regards,

Peter.

--