On Jun 20, 2004, at 19:50, Matthew Palmer wrote:
Let me ask you this: if there was an image viewer, which only viewed
one
format of images, and there were no images out there in that format,
would you
want to see that in Debian?
Well, it's hard to see there being an image viewer which
On Sun, Jun 27, 2004 at 09:12:03PM -0400, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
OK, you *are* making that argument. Why, then, should mpg321 stay in
main? Honestly, how many people play DFSG-free mp3s?
More than 1.
--
Raul
Lex Spoon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Brian Thomas Sniffen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, but that is a nitpick IMHO. What good is an offer that you never
plan to use? If you prefer, call the relevent clause of GPL to be an
offer of a contract, instead of being a contract itself. It
@ 27/06/2004 22:12 : wrote Anthony DeRobertis :
Is it illegal if I own a game cartridge, and dump it? That part
probably isn't; US copyright law, at least, give me permission to
make a backup copy.
Under BR computer programs act (9.609/98), one backup copies and
*all* copies deemed
On Sun, Jun 27, 2004 at 09:12:03PM -0400, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
That second case is pretty much where we stand with a *lot* of game
console
emulators out there -- the only way to get data to use with them is to
break
the law. Wonderful.
Is it illegal if I own a game cartridge, and
@ 28/06/2004 15:38 : wrote Brian Thomas Sniffen :
A whole bunch of your argument was balanced on the claim that one
had to accept the GPL in order to receive the licenses it offers,
because it's a contract, and that it had to be a contract, because
one had to accept it to receive certain
Humberto Massa [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
@ 28/06/2004 15:38 : wrote Brian Thomas Sniffen :
A whole bunch of your argument was balanced on the claim that one
had to accept the GPL in order to receive the licenses it offers,
because it's a contract, and that it had to be a contract, because
@ 29/06/2004 11:28 : wrote Brian Thomas Sniffen :
Humberto Massa [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
@ 28/06/2004 15:38 : wrote Brian Thomas Sniffen :
A whole bunch of your argument was balanced on the claim that
one had to accept the GPL in order to receive the licenses it
offers, because it's a
Andrew Suffield wrote:
On Sun, Jun 27, 2004 at 09:12:03PM -0400, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
That second case is pretty much where we stand with a *lot* of
game console emulators out there -- the only way to get data to
use with them is to break the law. Wonderful.
Is it illegal if I own a
On Tue, Jun 29, 2004 at 10:28:10AM -0400, Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
If I issue a license as my example above, but appending provided you
wear yellow underpants, and then discover that you have distributed
copies of the software without wearing yellow underpants, can I
enforce the contract
Humberto Massa [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
@ 29/06/2004 11:28 : wrote Brian Thomas Sniffen :
Humberto Massa [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
@ 28/06/2004 15:38 : wrote Brian Thomas Sniffen :
A whole bunch of your argument was balanced on the claim that
one had to accept the GPL in order
Raul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, Jun 29, 2004 at 10:28:10AM -0400, Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
If I issue a license as my example above, but appending provided you
wear yellow underpants, and then discover that you have distributed
copies of the software without wearing yellow
On Tue, 2004-06-29 at 16:28, Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
Humberto Massa [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
snip
Anyway, it depends on your jurisdiction. Here in Brasil, *every*
software license is a contract, and is ruled, aside from the
dispositions in Copyright Law (9.610/98) and Computer Programs
Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
Humberto Massa [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Anyway, it depends on your jurisdiction. Here in Brasil, *every*
software license is a contract, and is ruled, aside from the
dispositions in Copyright Law (9.610/98) and Computer Programs Law
(9.609/98), to Contract Law
On Tue, 2004-06-29 at 19:11, Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
If you ever see a license which suggests the death penalty, I do hope
you'll consider it non-free.
The license can never suggest such thing (i believe so also in BR law -
certainly belgian law), because the criminal part is enforced in
Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
Arnoud Engelfriet [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
Here, I send you this shell script I have written, which highlights
3com devices: 'cat /proc/pci | tr 3 \*'. I grant you a license to
use, modify, and distribute it, and to distribute
On Tue, 29 Jun 2004 00:23:40 +0100 MJ Ray wrote:
Interesting reply,
TNX
but it seems to have missed my main point.
Ouch, I apologize for this... ;p
On 2004-06-26 18:30:40 +0100 Francesco Poli [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
So, IIUC, you propose that summaries should be split into two
Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
Arnoud Engelfriet [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
My response: I do not accept the license grant. Therefore, I
have rejected your offer and so I am not bound to do anything
in return.
So if you say you want to give me your watch, and I say I want it, can
you not
Brian Thomas Sniffen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In any case, in the US a contract has a few requirements inconsistent
with a free license:
This, by the way, is the kind of thing that should be talked about.
Still, I am not clear on why these things *must* be non-free.
* A meeting of minds:
On Tue, Jun 29, 2004 at 08:12:52AM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
Andrew Suffield wrote:
On Sun, Jun 27, 2004 at 09:12:03PM -0400, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
That second case is pretty much where we stand with a *lot* of
game console emulators out there -- the only way to get data to
use
On Tue, 29 Jun 2004, Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
* A consideration: if the license document specifies consideration to
the licensor, the license can't be free.
For copyleft licenses, at least, the promise of future derivative
works being released with source under similar terms could quite
Lex Spoon wrote:
Brian Thomas Sniffen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* A consideration: if the license document specifies consideration to
the licensor, the license can't be free.
[...]
More interestingly, the consideration might be really minor. Suppose it
says you must email the author before
Hello Evan,
Sorry for the late reply, been rather busy...
On Sun, Jun 20, 2004 at 10:27:05PM -0400, Evan Prodromou wrote:
It seems kind of strange to me and some other debian-legal people that a
package was kept out of main because the data files it uses are
non-free. Even for emulators and
Glenn Maynard wrote:
On Tue, Jun 29, 2004 at 03:32:13PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
* It discriminates against people who cannot (or simply do not want to)
identify themselves (unless they have some sort of method to send
anonymous email). See also the Dissident test in the DFSG FAQ.
I'd
24 matches
Mail list logo
