about anyone, and Dhingis Kahn (The mogolian leader, don't know how he
is spelled in English).
Ganges Kahn, I believe. Don't have Google in front of me to check.
OK, let's clear this up right now. The standard spelling in English is
Ghengis Khan.
Occasionally you will see the supposedly more
On Thursday, Jul 3, 2003, at 12:58 US/Eastern, Joachim Breitner wrote:
I remember reading somewhere that you can give the copyright to just
about anyone, and Dhingis Kahn (The mogolian leader, don't know how he
is spelled in English).
Ganges Kahn, I believe. Don't have Google in front of me
On Monday, Jun 30, 2003, at 11:19 US/Eastern, Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS
wrote:
the chances of all the copyright holders in the Linux kernel agreeing
to a non-free release of Linux are probably lower than the chances of
the FSF agreeing to a non-free release of the GNU tools.
And far lower than
Hi,
Am Mon, 2003-06-30 um 12.30 schrieb Baptiste SIMON:
If you are author of a part of the code, you can oppose forever to its
publication as proprietary.
right... that's the last solution... but we would prefer having only one
copyright, to have a harmonized source code. I know that it
then just assign it so someone that is no longer alife (this way
you can state your world view, if you choose Ghandi, Marx, Charlemagne,
Einstein, Neumann or others). They surely won't change your licence...
(well, one would have to check for possible Heirs)
That's a little bit funny !! :c)
On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 06:58:49PM +0200, Joachim Breitner wrote:
I remember reading somewhere that you can give the copyright to just
about anyone, and Dhingis Kahn (The mogolian leader, don't know how he
is spelled in English). And if you really want to prevent any licence
change, then
Matthew Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
If the author had accepted patches from others to version 1, he would be
stuck with keeping later versions under the GPL unless he got a licence
change OK'd by each of the contributors, or removed the contributed code.
However, check the licence on the
On 2003-06-30 11:44:06 +0200, Baptiste SIMON wrote:
we are in this situation... and I want to prevent changin license by
holder of the copyright. So I'm looking for a solution, giving the
copyright to something, under some terms, etc...
Is there any solution ?
AFAIK No. Under european law
On Mon, 30 Jun 2003, Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS wrote:
Matthew Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
If the author had accepted patches from others to version 1, he would be
stuck with keeping later versions under the GPL unless he got a licence
change OK'd by each of the contributors, or removed the
Scripsit Baptiste SIMON [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In fact, anyone which is releasing his software under something like
GPL or LGPL is able, if he is still holding the code copyright, to
release a next release under any other license.
I'd like to prevent this kind of problem without giving copyright
1) The copyright holder(s) make(s) a decision to change the licence, and
future versions of the software are released under the terms of the new
licence;
we are in this situation... and I want to prevent changin license by
holder of the copyright. So I'm looking for a solution, giving the
Baptiste SIMON [EMAIL PROTECTED] a tapoté :
Hi people,
I'd like to know how debian has relsolved the copyright question. In fact,
anyone which is releasing his software under something like GPL or LGPL is
able, if he is still holding the code copyright, to release a next release
under any
If you are author of a part of the code, you can oppose forever to its
publication as proprietary.
right... that's the last solution... but we would prefer having only one
copyright, to have a harmonized source code. I know that it is possible
giving the (c) to the FSF... but I've heard about
On Sun, 29 Jun 2003, Baptiste SIMON wrote:
I'd like to know how debian has relsolved the copyright question. In fact,
anyone which is releasing his software under something like GPL or LGPL is
able, if he is still holding the code copyright, to release a next release
under any other license.
The question was more :
I want to find a solution for a project to prevent a license changement. I
would like to have a solution wich would guarantee this project to stay
under GPL (without giving the copyright to FSF). This is not for an
inclusion in the debian distro, but just take a look into
Henning Makholm [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
2. You're the author and want to prevent *yourself* from switching to
a non-free license in the future. Hmm? The best way would be to
decide not to do it, and then have the strength of character to
stick to your decision.
However, you might be
It is difficult to see what you feel is a problem here?
1. You're a user and you want to avoid the risk that the author
(...)
2. You're the author and want to prevent *yourself* from switching to
(...)
3. You're one of several authors and want to prevent the others from
taking the
Baptiste SIMON [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
we are in this situation... and I want to prevent changin license by
holder of the copyright. So I'm looking for a solution, giving the
copyright to something, under some terms, etc...
Is there any solution ?
If you want advice about setting up a trust,
On Monday, Jun 30, 2003, at 11:00 US/Eastern, Henning Makholm wrote:
I dimly remember that there may be jurisdictions (America?) where
any of several joint authors can authorize copying if only he
splits the profits fairly with other authors.
Yep. In the US, it's called a joint
On Sunday, Jun 29, 2003, at 07:17 US/Eastern, Baptiste SIMON wrote:
Hi people,
I'd like to know how debian has relsolved the copyright question. In
fact,
anyone which is releasing his software under something like GPL or
LGPL is
able, if he is still holding the code copyright, to release a
On Mon, Jun 30, 2003 at 11:44:06AM +0200, Baptiste SIMON wrote:
1) The copyright holder(s) make(s) a decision to change the licence, and
future versions of the software are released under the terms of the new
licence;
we are in this situation... and I want to prevent changin license by
Hi people,
I'd like to know how debian has relsolved the copyright question. In fact,
anyone which is releasing his software under something like GPL or LGPL is
able, if he is still holding the code copyright, to release a next release
under any other license.
I'd like to prevent this kind of
22 matches
Mail list logo
