|
|
#2 (permalink) Sat Dec 24, 2005 10:46 am Licence/license |
|
|
Hi yt_hon,
In British English there are two forms: verb license noun licence. In the same way you have: practise (verb) and practice (noun).
As you can see, both words can be either noun or verb. In American English the spelling is license for both.
Alan _________________ English as a Second Language You can read my ESL story A day in the life of a policeman |
|
Alan Co-founder

Joined: 27 Sep 2003 Posts: 9191 Location: UK
|
|
#3 (permalink) Sat Dec 24, 2005 11:22 am "License" as "GET license" |
|
|
Thank you Alan, but actually that was not my question.
I understand "license" is used as a verb in the two cases I listed, . And in both cases, I could tell from the whole context (but not from the sentences themselves) that "license" meant "GET permission to use the technology".
My point is, when you say, "Company X licenses the technology ", how can I tell if it means, "Company X GETs permission to use the technology", or "Company X GIVESs permission to use the technology"? Is understanding the whole context the only way?
Is my question clear? |
|
Yt_Hon New Member
Joined: 24 Dec 2005 Posts: 5 Location: Japan
|
 |
#4 (permalink) Sat Dec 24, 2005 17:19 pm "License" as "GET license" |
|
|
"Lisense" can be used both as "to issue a licence" and "give permission to use". So when someone gives license to someone else, then the former gives the latter permission, not vice versa. The one who gives permission is the one who licenses. Does it make sense? _________________ Learning is a sacred engagement. |
|
Ahmadov I'm here quite often ;-)

Joined: 23 Dec 2005 Posts: 312 Location: Azerbaijan
|
 |
#5 (permalink) Sun Dec 25, 2005 10:43 am "License" as "GET license" |
|
|
Thank you Ahmadov, too.
Your answer is getting closer to my point, but not quite yet.
If I apply your (and dictionaries') definition to the two examples I listed,
A) NTP requested that RIM license its patents ... would be, "NTP requested that RIM Give Permission To Use its patents ..."
B) If RIM ends up refusing to license the technology ... would be, "If RIM ends up refusing to Give Permission To Use the technology ..."
Then, it is more natural to conclude that RIM holds the patent. But, if you read the articles fully, you'll learn RIM does not hold the patent. It is NTP who holds the patent. So, the above examples should be read as,
A) NTP requested that RIM "GET" permission to use its patents ... B) If RIM ends up refusing to "GET" permission to use the technology ...
My question, again, is "Is the above use of "license" common?"
The fact that two prominent magazines used the "license" in a way to mean "GET permission to", I am guessing that such use can happen. But how often? Very rarely but sometimes? Quite often? Or, did the authors of the articles simply make mistakes? |
|
Yt_Hon New Member
Joined: 24 Dec 2005 Posts: 5 Location: Japan
|
 |
#6 (permalink) Sun Dec 25, 2005 11:55 am "License" as "GET license" |
|
|
Well, I think there is a problem in the article. Are you sure that the authors of the articles get advice from www.english-test.net in order not to make mistakes in their articles???  _________________ Learning is a sacred engagement. |
|
Ahmadov I'm here quite often ;-)

Joined: 23 Dec 2005 Posts: 312 Location: Azerbaijan
|
 |
#7 (permalink) Tue Apr 11, 2006 9:26 am "License" as "GET license" |
|
|
| yt_hon wrote: |
Thank you Ahmadov, too.
Your answer is getting closer to my point, but not quite yet.
If I apply your (and dictionaries') definition to the two examples I listed,
A) NTP requested that RIM license its patents ... would be, "NTP requested that RIM Give Permission To Use its patents ..."
B) If RIM ends up refusing to license the technology ... would be, "If RIM ends up refusing to Give Permission To Use the technology ..."
Then, it is more natural to conclude that RIM holds the patent. But, if you read the articles fully, you'll learn RIM does not hold the patent. It is NTP who holds the patent. So, the above examples should be read as,
A) NTP requested that RIM "GET" permission to use its patents ... B) If RIM ends up refusing to "GET" permission to use the technology ...
My question, again, is "Is the above use of "license" common?"
The fact that two prominent magazines used the "license" in a way to mean "GET permission to", I am guessing that such use can happen. But how often? Very rarely but sometimes? Quite often? Or, did the authors of the articles simply make mistakes? |
Yes - It is quite common nowadays.
e.g. My company wants to licence Microsoft's technology to build into their products.
Microsoft owns the technology. My company wants to obtain permission to use it.
Whilst I have a good grasp of language and language structure, I am not an expert. So I can't claim this usage is academically pure or correct - but I can confirm it is in common regular use.
HTH Colin. |
|
brandy Guest
|
 |
#8 (permalink) Tue Apr 11, 2006 13:01 pm "License" as "GET license" |
|
|
License in the sense you're asking about is to get official permission -- or usually pay for official permission -- to use a patent, a recipe, a design, etc.
Yes, when a person or a company gets the permission or rights to produce something from someone else's design, we say that they get license to produce it. Whoever gives them the permission is the one who grants license.
License in the sense of a permit that you can hold in your hand (such as a driver's license or a pilot's license) is used with an article. "You need to get a license to drive."
However, license in the sense of permission is a sort of uncountable noun (a mass noun) used without an article. "They were granted license to produce the product."
Note also that license can sometimes mean the possibility to do absolutely anything you want. In civics class, the teachers always warned us not to confuse freedom with license. |
|
Jamie (K) I'm a Communicator ;-)
Joined: 24 Feb 2006 Posts: 5332 Location: Detroit, Michigan, USA
|
 |
|
| Find vs reveal | Meaning of "cute tykes" |