afraid.
Best regards,
Arnoud Engelfriet
(European patent attorney and TILA)
--
IT lawyer, blogger and patent attorney ~ Partner at ICTRecht.nl legal services
http://www.arnoud.engelfriet.net/ ~ http://www.iusmentis.com/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org
instrument under certain conditions.
Kind regards,
Arnoud Engelfriet
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20111229124545.ga79...@stack.nl
Ben Finney wrote:
This does, to my mind, permit using the mark to say ???this product
supports that other product and/or service???, and doesn't need the
trademark holder's permission.
Whether other jurisdictions have a similar allowance, I don't know.
To my knowledge this is a fairly
Michael Crawford wrote:
While Fraunhofer et. al. might be willing to overlook MP3 player
developers who code them just to scratch an itch, I have to be
*scrupulously* careful to obey the law where I live, which is in the
software-patent-enforcing US of A. While not yet profitable, Ogg Frog
Steve Langasek wrote:
On Mon, Sep 01, 2008 at 01:49:38PM -0500, Jordi Guti?rrez Hermoso wrote:
2008/9/1 Christofer C. Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
The AGPLv3 requires you to re-export that code in the event that you
modify server software using it -- even if exporting crypto is illegal
for
Miriam Ruiz wrote:
2008/9/2 Arnoud Engelfriet [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Not necessarily. A court may find the illegal clause severable and
act as if that clause wasn't there. Or it may rule that compliance
with the clause in question cannot be demanded from the licensee.
That leaves the rest
Miriam Ruiz wrote:
2008/9/2 Arnoud Engelfriet [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
What about it? A finding by a court that a GPL clause is severable
or that I am excused from complying with it is not a condition in
the sense of article 12.
OK, I trust you in this, but shouldn't we wait for a court
Ben Finney wrote:
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Even if the claim
of my monkey wrote it were true, there is no argument given to
conclude any particular legal status; merely an assertion that no
copyright should apply.
That's true. I am not at all convinced his monkey
Ben Finney wrote:
A package for which we have no explicit license to redistribute cannot
go into any of main, contrib, or non-free. It simply cannot be legally
redistributed at all without that explicit grant of license.
The author claims that the package is in the public domain because
it was
Ben Finney wrote:
Given the potential of infringing acts by a downstream user
of the thumbnails distributed by Debian, we recommend that Debian
distribute the images under the same license under which it
distributes the underlying game code.
I'm confused by this. The preceding
Ben Finney wrote:
I don't think is intended for [use Foo, Bar, Baz] only is a
restriction upon the recipient. It states the *intent*, but isn't
phrased as a condition or restriction on what the recipient actually
may do.
I agree. My reading is that this is a warning of some kind. If you use
Ken Arromdee wrote:
On Sun, 22 Jun 2008, Francesco Poli wrote:
OK, that said, if you wanted to modify a public key (in order to obtain
something else), what form would you use for making modifications?
I think the preferred form would be the one in which the GPG public key
is distributed
Francesco Poli wrote:
On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 18:15:16 +0200 Arnoud Engelfriet wrote:
I don't think that modifying has any reasonable meaning when talking
about cryptographic keys.
Why not?
Because it implies that you'd obtain something meaningful after
the modification. The intent
Ben Finney wrote:
Arnoud Engelfriet [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I would argue that this is a kind of 'announcement' of the game
which is covered by quotation rights under Berne.
That may well be true, and would be a good result in this instance.
Can you cite which particular provisions
Miriam Ruiz wrote:
The games-thumbnails package is needed for GoPlay!, so that game
descriptions can show a snapshot of how the game looks like.
I would argue that this is a kind of 'announcement' of the game
which is covered by quotation rights under Berne. It is certainly
extremely common
in other
countries) would put the Copyright with Andy.
Ehm, no. Unless the contract between Tanenbaum and the writer transfers
copyright to Tanenbaum.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http
)(2)). Best case for them then is that the court lowers
the damages awarded to the copyright holder.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com/
Arnoud blogt nu
that his or her acts constituted an infringement of copyright, the court in
its discretion may reduce the award of statutory damages to a sum of not
less than $200. ...
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/504.html
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com/
Arnoud blogt nu ook: http://blog.iusmentis.com/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe
a GPLv3 work and convey
only the remaining parts, I don't see anything unlawful about offering
execute-only access to a binary and read access to the manpage and/or
configuration files.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR
.)
But if it *were* copied, wouldn't that make you secondarily liable
under the MGM/Grokster doctrine?
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com/
Arnoud blogt nu ook
on.
If the system has a world-readable /usr/src with full sources, I
would argue that satisfies any obligation to make source available.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com
?
toad:~ ls -l /bin/ls
-r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel 29624 Jan 15 04:30 /bin/ls*
toad:~ cp /bin/ls myls
toad:~
Can I now demand the source to /bin/ls from the administrators of 'toad'?
Probably it's more in the making available category of copyright
infringement.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com/
Arnoud blogt nu ook: http://blog.iusmentis.com/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe
as.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com/
Arnoud blogt nu ook: http://blog.iusmentis.com/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject
of Stevenson v. TRW Inc., 987 F.2d 288, 296
(5th Cir. 1993).
A contract's warranty disclaimer satisfies the conspicuous requirement
when it is printed in all capital letters, when it appears in a larger type
than the terms around it, or when it is in a larger and boldface type.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud
holder). This claim includes the right to
be mentioned as the author. If the author has exercised this
right, removing the notice from the work violates this right.
Under US law, art. 6bis Berne does not apply (even though it should)
to authors of computer programs.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet
work can be
distributed in binary-only form, then the copyright notices in the
source code become irrelevant. In such a case, a requirement like
article 2 of the BSD license to put a notice in the documentation
would be a good idea.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney
Ben Finney wrote:
Arnoud Engelfriet [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
One case where this could become problematic is when permission is
granted to create derivative works. If the derivative work can be
distributed in binary-only form, then the copyright notices in the
source code become
. If information is
undisclosed and has commercial value because it is secret, the owner
of the information has a cause of action against people who misappropriate
this information from him. (Very funny, repeating that key here).
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only
/t_agm2_e.htm
I'm not sure if any law has a more precise definition. The term IP
is well-enough understood as a term of art for copyrights, patents,
trademarks, semiconductor rights, plant breeders' rights and so on.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
) be taken as a set of
conclusive statements on the subject.
This is law; there's no such thing as a conclusive statement here.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com
the
work on that carrier without restriction, including redistributing it.
This right does not apply to downloaded software.
TINLA and all that.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http
John Halton wrote:
On 21/12/2007, Arnoud Engelfriet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If the copyright holder makes a program available for download
(or permits someone else to do so), then I would say that anyone who
downloads the work is a lawful acquirer and therefore may execute
the work
a statement of fact (in most cases) as
anything else.
True. In business-to-consumer transactions the question if you can
waive liability (and if so, how much) is a big one. It could thus
theoretically become relevant if the consumer accepted a waiver at all.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch
would have expired 50 years
after the death of the author.
Arnoud
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kanzul_Iman
[2] http://copyright.gov.in/
[3] http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ShowResults.jsp?lang=entreaty_id=15
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Joerg's original work.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com/
Arnoud blogt nu ook: http://blog.iusmentis.com/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED
.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com/
Arnoud blogt nu ook: http://blog.iusmentis.com/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject
of
international copyright treaties. Berne provides for moral rights
for almost all categories of works (art. 6bis), but 17 USC 106A
only provides this right for a work of visual art.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright
where to get the source
from you to network users of the work.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com/
Arnoud blogt nu ook: http://blog.iusmentis.com
then be associated with those people. I can imagine
some authors not liking that. This could give them a cause of action
under moral rights.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com
with anonymous services like NTP.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com/
Arnoud blogt nu ook: http://blog.iusmentis.com/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED
on
moral rights.
Regardless of who owns the copyright and regardless of the license,
if you mutilate a work and harm the original maker's reputation,
he has a cause of action for violation of his moral rights against you.
This right cannot be waived, transferred or bought off.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud
are saying here.
The LGPL specifically permits the creation of certain derivative works
that may be distributed under non-(L)GPL terms. The LGPL was
originally intended for libraries (its original name was Library GPL)
but can of course be applied to any work.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch
the parties that subsequently use
the GPL as their license agreement. Of course the US-centricness
of the GPL's terms could cause problems, but there's a severability
clause so these problems should not be fatal.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only
libraries).
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com/
Arnoud blogt nu ook: http://blog.iusmentis.com/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED
://www.washington.edu/pine/faq/legal.html
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com/
Arnoud blogt nu ook: http://blog.iusmentis.com/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL
authors.
Dutch law forbids anyone from setting up a rights collection society
without permission from the Minister of Economic affairs. Since
we already have BUMA, Stemra, SENA and all the others, you will
not get such permission.
Otherwise, excellent explanation!
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch
on
the Teletubbies.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com/
Arnoud blogt nu ook: http://blog.iusmentis.com/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED
the license of a data file can affect the licensing
status of a program that processes the data file.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com/
Arnoud blogt nu ook
Olive wrote:
Arnoud Engelfriet wrote:
If the selection of the data that was put in the database involved
creative activity by its maker, then yes you need a copyright license.
If the database was created by a European company, then you need
a license under its database right. (No database
be leaking of confidential information.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com/
Arnoud blogt nu ook: http://blog.iusmentis.com/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL
Khalid Aziz wrote:
On Tue, 2007-07-24 at 21:03 +0200, Arnoud Engelfriet wrote:
I don't know this tool at all. Does it only transform your input
into code, or is some code written by this Robert van Engelen also
inserted? For example, startup code or some standard library?
This tool
.
This is indeed similar to gcc, which adds code from libgcc (or
libstdc++) to your program. But gcc has an exception that permits
you to use whatever license you want to the output.
http://www.mingw.org/MinGWiki/index.php/SharedLibgccLegal
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent
is that it was borrowed from an LGPL *v2*
library into a GPL *v2* project. If a later version of glibc
is licensed solely under GPLv3, that won't affect the borrowed
code that is in the kernel.
If the GPLv2 kernel somehow used an LGPLv3 library, things would
get interesting.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch
is actually grandfathered by this date.
That was the whole point of including that date. That was discussed
when discussion drafts 3 and 4 came out.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http
that Debian tries to use GPLv2 whenever
possible.
Arnoud (IAALBINYL)
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com/
Arnoud blogt nu ook: http://blog.iusmentis.com
to be an attorney qualified to give the advice.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com/
Arnoud blogt nu ook: http://blog.iusmentis.com/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email
Thomas Dickey wrote:
sadly enough, _real_ lawyers represent their client,
and depending on the context will contradict themselves.
Well, if clients contradict each other the lawyer has no choice
but to play along...
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only
what the GPL says.
Only when I redistribute the software do I need to worry about
the GPL provisions.
IANYL, TINLA.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com
is] in the courts for the place of performance of
the obligation in question. If I'm in the Netherlands and distribute
CDDL software to a Belgian citizen while violating the CDDL, the
copyright holder has to come to the Netherlands, choice-of-venue
(mostly) notwithstanding.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet
Don Armstrong wrote:
On Mon, 04 Jun 2007, Arnoud Engelfriet wrote:
If I'm in the Netherlands and distribute
CDDL software to a Belgian citizen while violating the CDDL, the
copyright holder has to come to the Netherlands, choice-of-venue
(mostly) notwithstanding.
From the summary
listed.
I also do not see anything that says no other criteria will be used,
or that anything that meets the DFSG *must* be included.
It just says, _if_ it's in Debian, it's DFSG-free.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright
jurisdiction, which may make life
very interesting once a verdict has been issued and the European
person goes on holiday to the USA.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com
(3)(c).
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
the contract against the plaintiff, or ...
TINLA of course. I have never seen this argument made before.
Considering the number of sniping software packages out there
eBay doesn't seem to be very interested in pursuing these
packages.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney
Francesco Poli wrote:
On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 21:41:45 +0200 Arnoud Engelfriet wrote:
Yes, these are vague criteria but that is to a certain extent
inherent in trademark law. You don't know what people will do
and how that can affect your trademark.
Wait, the Debian Project should clarify
Francesco Poli wrote:
On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 08:05:36 +0200 Arnoud Engelfriet wrote:
Ok, then I would suggest moving that out of the first sentence and
into a new paragraph. The above exception only applies for the
situations described in Exhibit Z. Then you can write an Exhibit Z
for your
Francesco Poli wrote:
On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 20:19:19 +0200 Arnoud Engelfriet wrote:
The mere fact that I use the name and logo of the project can't
be reason enough to assume affiliation or association.
Mmmh, the Debian Official Use Logo implies endorsement by the Debian
Project.
Yes
Francesco Poli wrote:
On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 22:41:49 +0200 Arnoud Engelfriet wrote:
Why would you do that?
Because there can be more than one logo with different meanings.
As you know, the Debian Project has currently two logos[1]:
I understand that. But I think it is sufficient if you
MJ Ray wrote:
Arnoud Engelfriet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I also don't see a need to indicate a field for the mark when you
license people to do anything with the mark. So maybe you should
just omit the entire Z thing.
How about to avoid accidentally licensing a second mark in a different
Francesco Poli wrote:
On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 09:09:11 +0200 Arnoud Engelfriet wrote:
The sign X, registered as a trademark under number $NUM in
$REGION,...
I don't know if Debian logos are actually *registered* marks.
Possibly, they are just unregistered trademarks...
Does anybody know
Francesco Poli wrote:
On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 21:24:00 +0200 Arnoud Engelfriet wrote:
The sign [X] (hereafter the Mark) is a trademark, rights to which
are held by [Y], representing [Z] if applicable (hereafter the
Mark Holder).
Wait, the Mark Holder would be [Y], I think.
I thought you
Francesco Poli wrote:
On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 09:57:33 +0200 Arnoud Engelfriet wrote:
I thought you used Y and Z for cases where Y is licensing Z's
trademark (if Y is Z's subsidiary or authorized licensee for example).
Then the trademark holder is Z but Y has certain rights to the mark.
Err
licenses, only acts that involve
distribution come with conditions. But that is a special case.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL
Francesco Poli wrote:
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 20:29:09 +0200 Arnoud Engelfriet wrote:
Your argument is that the trademark holder will win, because the
licensee exceeded the trademark license. I am afraid someone will
argue that the copyright license (from the same entity) should count
--- somewhere between
the copyright and the trademark part? Or do you want to make it
two files, Copyright.license and Trademark.license?
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com
Francesco Poli wrote:
On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 22:28:15 +0200 Arnoud Engelfriet wrote:
If the Mark qualifies as an original work of authorship under
copyright law, then the above license includes the right to use, copy,
modify, merge, publish, distribute and sell the Mark or any derivative
agrees with you.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
permits me to apply the GPL's own terms when I
distribute my modified version, but imposes no restrictions when
I do not distribute it.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com
Ben Finney wrote:
Arnoud Engelfriet [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I understand that. It's certainly possible. But what happens if
someone stays within the bounds of the copyright license, and
strays outside the bounds of the trademark license? Which one wins?
As a copyright holder
Francesco Poli wrote:
On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 13:06:39 +0200 Arnoud Engelfriet wrote:
Your use of the trademark may not create a sense of endorsement,
sponsorship, or false association with the trademark holder.
Your use of the trademark may not diminish the distinctiveness
no false representation with a qualification that it would
have to be clearly deceptive. If I were giving legal advice,
I would advise against that limitation. But I'm not so I'm not.
Arnoud
PS Sorry about the cc, I thought my mutt was trained not to do that.
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European
a sense of endorsement,
sponsorship, or false association with the trademark holder.
Your use of the trademark may not diminish the distinctiveness
of the trademark or harm the reputation of the trademark holder.
Arnoud
(IAA European trademark attorney but TINLA)
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch
MJ Ray wrote:
Arnoud Engelfriet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...] When a user does apt-get install firefox
he is not saying I want to install a firefox, but I want to install
the browser with the name Firefox.
Or are they saying I want to install a web browser in a similar to those
people
MJ Ray wrote:
Arnoud Engelfriet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I guess then I don't understand why. What I saw was a package
called 'firefox' that Depends: on Iceweasel. So that means
if I type ``apt-get install firefox'', apt-get will see the
dependency and install Iceweasel. That's where I
string ``firefox'', then I would
consider that a bug in those components rather than a justification for
calling the Iceweasel package ``firefox''. But perhaps I missed
something?
Arnoud
(trademark attorney but TINLA)
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Joe Smith wrote:
Arnoud Engelfriet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
What I don't understand is why a package for the Iceweasel software
would carry the name firefox. There's no such thing as a firefox.
There is such thing as a firefox. In fact there are wo
Jacobo Tarrio wrote:
El mi?rcoles, 6 de diciembre de 2006 a las 16:26:27 +0100, Arnoud Engelfriet
escrib?a:
What I don't understand is why a package for the Iceweasel software
would carry the name firefox. There's no such thing as a firefox. There
It is not a package for Iceweasel
that the word 'firefox' is a parameter to apt-get
or refers to a file of the same name. All that matters is
that installing this package with the name 'firefox' gives
you an installation of the Iceweasel browser.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only
the binary a lot or it won't fit
would be a reasonable argument, and then there's no need to
provide C versions of the modifications.
(There even won't *be* a C version in that case. Perhaps that is
a better yardstick?)
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking
and
then converted to PDF. While I can create a more-or-less useful HTML
version, I prefer to work on them in the proprietary Word format.
Suppose Debian would like to package the PDF files, what would be
the source? Word? The HTML? The PDF itself?
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European
definitions
that have consensus in the relevant circles. If most people
would prefer the real C over the disassembled machine code,
then the real C is the source.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http
Francesco Poli wrote:
On Wed, 1 Nov 2006 18:38:34 +0100 Arnoud Engelfriet wrote:
But if I release a .ps file, it would be output from
LaTeX and so it seems reasonable to insist that the software isn't
free until the .tex file is available.
In cases where the PostScript file is generated
to insist that the software isn't
free until the .tex file is available.
Would you be happy if Debian main was filled with assembly listings?
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http
and
GPL-licensed kernel is a derivative of the kernel, then anyone
with a copyright interest in the kernel can sue for not obeying
the GPL.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http
, it is in the public domain no matter
where it has been.
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#CombinePublicDomainWithGPL
I don't see a reason why this answer would be different for BSD
licensed code as opposed to public domain code.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney
Michael Poole wrote:
Arnoud Engelfriet writes:
However I didn't see a signature in the text file.
Only the guy's name.
At least in the US, the relevant law (why I mentioned affirmative
acts) is what make click-through agreements binding -- the act of
clicking is the user's electronic
of
the Old Version and revoke all licenses to the extent possible.
I don't know if that is the case, but I wouldn't be surprised.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com
a piece of paper with Adam's signature saying otherwise,
the copyright remains with him. So Ed should ensure he does not
change the copyright notice.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http
1 - 100 of 201 matches
Mail list logo
