On Tue, 2003-12-09 at 17:22, Andrew Suffield wrote:
Actually, it's closer than you think. Any product [arbitrary
definition] that requires all three components is a derivative work of
all of them; that will almost certainly violate one or more of the
licenses.
It may be; it may not be. Not
Anthony DeRobertis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have thus, even with STENOG included, satisfied the terms of the
INVERT license.
Now, there is a potential problem. Remember that scripting language
mentioned before? If someone were to write a script that used both
INVERT and STENOG, and then
On Dec 8, 2003, at 10:00, Måns Rullgård wrote:
What I'm trying to find out is, whether or not it's allowed to write a
plugin, using GPL,d libraries, for a program with MIT license, for
which there also exists plugins using OpenSSL (or anything
GPL-incompatible).
As long as its really a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Brian T. Sniffen) writes:
Anthony DeRobertis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have thus, even with STENOG included, satisfied the terms of the
INVERT license.
Now, there is a potential problem. Remember that scripting language
mentioned before? If someone were to write a
On Dec 9, 2003, at 11:52, Brian T. Sniffen wrote:
Anthony DeRobertis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have thus, even with STENOG included, satisfied the terms of the
INVERT license.
Now, there is a potential problem. Remember that scripting language
mentioned before? If someone were to write a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Måns Rullgård) writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Brian T. Sniffen) writes:
Anthony DeRobertis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have thus, even with STENOG included, satisfied the terms of the
INVERT license.
Now, there is a potential problem. Remember that scripting language
Anthony DeRobertis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
They had to receive it under the terms of the GPL. They also received
AIE under the terms of the MIT X11 license. The work is sort-of
dual-licensed, in the sense that the X11 license is compatible with
the GPL.
Yes, but they can't distribute
On Tue, 2003-12-09 at 18:00, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
On Dec 9, 2003, at 11:52, Brian T. Sniffen wrote:
I will
point out that further distributors who wish to distribute AIE and
INVERT will essentially be bound by the GPL with regards to AIE, even
though it is under the MIT/X11
On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 11:10:05AM -0500, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
Now, there is a potential problem. Remember that scripting language
mentioned before? If someone were to write a script that used both
INVERT and STENOG, and then distribute that script, there might be a
problem. But that's
Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 11:10:05AM -0500, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
Now, there is a potential problem. Remember that scripting language
mentioned before? If someone were to write a script that used both
INVERT and STENOG, and then distribute that
10 matches
Mail list logo
