similar to: What is the Datasets License?

Hello all, I hope this question is appropriate for this ML. Basically, I am wondering if when you create a new variable, if the variable holds some information about how it was created. Let me explain, I have the following code to replicate an example in a textbook (Greene's Econometric Analysis), using the systemfit package. dta <-

Dear R Developers, Recently filed (and dismissed ;) ) law suit by Astrolabe against tz database developers caused a lot of media-press and discussions and created some kind of precedence in the USA [3]. But also it imho showed that similar attacks might happen in the future, and possibly against data sets which are not that obviously "factual" thus after all might fall under copyright

Dear All, I would like to publish a function for 'heckit' estimations together with two examples from Greene's and Wooldridge's econometric textbooks. These examples use the dataset of Mroz (1987) that is also available in John Fox' "car" package. However, not all variables that are used in my examples are available in the "car" package. Therefore, I

Dear all, This is a little bit off-topic, but I was wondering if anyone has any informed opinion on whether data (ie. a dataset) is copyrightable? Hadley

Dear All, thanks a lot for all the quick and helpful responses! I'm currently interested in the "stance" of this community towards closed source contributions. The way I understand it, currently my options are quite limited: I would most likely need to use a remote procedure call API, and build one side of the API as GPL. But this would make the coupling much slower and more

Dear List, I am building a R package which collects ecological data about plant species from both remote (web) databases and locally stored rda files (datasets): these "local rda files" are derived from publicly available databases for which no "official" licenses are provided; I was told by the creators of these databases that users can use such data provided that the

I'm attempting to use the metadata level 2 interface to get at the various interesting bits, which is working fine. But I also need a relevant piece of data, the offset of where the metadata ends, and the audio blocks begin. I'm not finding a clear way to reach that number. Is this exposed anywhere? Thanks. -D -- The revolution will be documented.

--- Dan Sully <daniel@electricrain.com> wrote: > I'm attempting to use the metadata level 2 interface to get at the > various > interesting bits, which is working fine. But I also need a relevant > piece of > data, the offset of where the metadata ends, and the audio blocks > begin. I'm > not finding a clear way to reach that number. Is this exposed >

Hello all, I was wondering if someone can enlighten me as to the difference between the logLik in R vis-a-vis Stata for a GLM model with the gamma family. Stata calculates the loglikelihood of the model as (in R notation) some equivalent function of -1/scale * sum(Y/mu+log(mu)+(scale-1)*log(Y)+log(scale)+scale*lgamma(1/scale)) where scale (or dispersion) = 1, Y = the response variable, and mu

Hi, I'm not so far, by now, of publicly releasing the next version of our web site which is extensively using Xapian, so I thought it was time to say "thank you" by adding in the footer and in the "credits" page of my site the Xapian logo with a link back to the Xapian web site. I was surprised to discover how hard it was for me to find how to do... I'm not a

The current wxRuby license is too complicated. It is licensed under the wxWidgets/wxWindows license, which sounds straightforward. But if you look at the LICENSE file, you''ll see that the license itself is copyrighted by the wxWidgets folks, but we are applying it to wxRuby. Beyond that, the wxWidgets license itself is confusing. It starts out as LGPL (and refers you to COPYING.LIB),

Possibly more of a legal question than a technical development question, but here goes. In the doc\COPYRIGHTS file it is made clear that the intention is that you can write R packages and distribute them under licenses not compatible with GPL, by making the relevant header files available under the LGPL. This was an explicit change that was made in February 2001, and allows for DLLs that

Dear All, I've been following this mailing list for over three years now, but its just now that I have realized that R is licensed under GPL! :-) I'm not a lawyer and I don't want lawyer advice, but I'd like to get your feedback on a license question. My goal is to develop commercial software for image analysis of biomedical samples that may be used i.e. in academic institutions.

Hello, CentOS team and everyone who cares about CentOS, Huawei release an Euler OS, which is an distribution based on CentOS. http://developer.huawei.com/ict/en/site-euleros/euleros-introduction According to CentOS's statement, CentOS is distributed under the GPLv2 License. http://mirror.centos.org/centos/7.4.1708/os/x86_64/EULA The GPL license requires the modified version to be

Adding this SHA256 code made me read the BSD license once again. It says: * 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright * notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the * documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution. Then there are a few files from Cyrus as well which contain: * 4. Redistributions of any form

Not sure, I'm reopening an OLD thread here (sorry). I need some answers, looking somewhere I found this: http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/dnkerb/html/MSDN_PAC.asp I'm not sure, I just gave it a brieft read. Can't this be used to include PAC data on a kerberos ticket in order to use the kerberos autentication on win2k/xp? I know that it also

Hey guys, I have a question about CrossOver and the LGPL license. I'm looking into licensing some software of my own and I'm not sure if I can. >From what I've read the LGPL license doesn't allow any product to be sold if it's based on LGPL protected software, unless it uses the software simply as a plug-in: > A program that contains no derivative of any portion of the

Hoping someone can clear up a licencing question... My understanding is that R is licensed under the GPL, with some headers licensed under the LGPL (per COPYRIGHTS, so that R plugins don't have to be GPL - arguably incorrect, but besides the point). JRI states that it is licensed under the LGPL - but it links against R shared libraries (or so is my understanding - please correct me if I'm

Good afternoon. The ISC (Internet Software Consortium) license[1] is a permissive, open-source license that is considered "functionally equivalent"[2] to the Simplified (2-clause) BSD[3] and MIT[4] licenses, but with extraneous language removed. There is at least one package on CRAN which incorporates some code using it[5]. Are there plans to include this license in the list at

Hello. We are trying to install R on our network, and I wanted to ask if there is a user license agreement. I will be grateful if somebody can send me a link to it; if one exists. Thank you very much ******************************************* Antonio Paredes USDA- Center for Veterinary Biologics Biometrics Unit 510 South 17th Street, Suite 104 Ames, IA 50010 (515) 232-5785 [[alternative