Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

RE: SUO: RE: Cyc Upper Ontology offer


<snip> Notice that the agreement requires that any use of any axioms which
are *logically equivalent* to any part of Cyc, even if translated into any
other natural or artificial language, must be credited to Cycorp. This means
that if one uses any part of the Cyc upper ontology and if they also assert
that, say, every relation is a thing, or that spatial containment is
transitive, then they must acknowledge that Cycorp owns the copyright to
that assertion, even if it is made in, say, EPISTLE, or even in English, and
even if they had said it before in other places; in fact, even if Aristotle
had said it before. </snip> 

Wow! 
	.	Maybe not so marvellous after all. I presume this means
there is at least considerable negotiations in front of us before we can
even look at taking up Cyc. 

	.	I would suggest Cyc would get considerable advantage by
being adopted by the SUO. I would hope that would make it attractive for
them to retract this condition. I presume the clause would be totally
unacceptable to all of us, as well as the IEEE. 

	.	The offer did seem too good to be true. Maybe it was. 



Cheers   				Graham Horn
National Data Standards Unit
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare 
================================================
Phone:      	02.6244.1094  
Fax:          	02.6244.1199  
E­mail:    	Graham.Horn@aihw.gov.au <mailto:graham.horn@aihw.gov.au>