License for Stanford Binary CRF NER

[lindenksv]

The file CoreNLP-4.5.9/doc/ner/LICENSE-cyc.txt references the Stanford CRF NER Software license, which appears to have been granted to Cycorp under the restriction that they cannot redistribute the work, only derivatives of it. Is what is in the repo a derivative? Did Cycorp comply? What does that mean for other users besides Cycorp??

[AngledLuffa]

This license is dual licensed for commercial and non-commercial applications. It is a free license for users who aren't using it for commercial applications. @manning can explain it better than I can.

I'm not sure why Cycorp specifically is mentioned. Other commercial users have bought licenses.

IDK if anyone has failed to comply with the license.

[lindenksv]

Yes, I understand the dual nature of the license for the CoreNLP as a whole. But, this particular file indicates an Apache 2.0 + additional restriction framework that's unrelated to GPL and since it seems to be a license specifically granted to Cycorp, I'm not sure how to read other people's obligations under it or whether or not Cycorp itself is providing something here that's in compliance with the license they were granted. If what they're providing is already a derivative, then we, as licensees should be good. But if they didn't provide a derivative as required, then maybe the onus is on the licensee to do so? And, read strictly, if Cycorp is trying to flow this license down to licensees (unclear), then technically they're asking that all licensees also create a derivative of Cycor's own derivative. Again, that would mean licensees must take an affirmative action with respect to the code in order to comply with the license.